la 


AsMclation  for  Infermation  and  liiia««  Managmwnt 

1 1 00  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1 1 00 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  209tO 

301/587-8202 


J 


■     \ 


f     :#  ■■ 


> 


k 


A 


O 


* 


.«• 


* 


,*i 


Centimeter 

2         3        4        5        6         7        8        9        10       11       12      13       14       15   mm 

miiImiiIiiiiIiiiJiiiiIiimIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiIiiiiImiiIiiiiIiimIiiiiIimiImiiIiiiiIiiiiIimiIiiiiImmImiiIiiiiIiiiiIiii^ 


m 


Inches 


ijJmjIynJmJnMJ^^ 


1 


.     \ 


1.0 

3 

LA1Z8 

4 

1^ 

ta 

I.I  * 

1^ 

1.6 

1.25   1 

1.4 

,.f^ 


■■/ 


..I 


■*-'      ,    y 


^ 


1 


:0' 


■^^,.  ^ 


MRNUFRCTURED  TO  PIIM  STRNDORDS 
BY  flF^PLIED   IMRGE,    INC. 


y  I 


^ 


^.1^ 


'!«. 


<i°  «?. 


V    ^J 

*^^ 


r  i 


9 
\ 


^ 


i^ 


CIHIVI 
Microfiche 
Series 
(l\ffpnographs} 


ICIWIH 

Collection  de  « 
microfiches 
(monographles) 


■»■*  ^1 


.."^ : 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historical  IVlicroreproductions  /  Inltitut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historiques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  NoMs  /.{lojcs  techniques  et  bibliographicfuer 


The  kistitute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best  original 
CORY  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this  copy  which 
may  be  bibliographically  unique,  which  may  alter  any 
of  the  images  in  the  reproduction,  or  which  may 
significantly  change  the  usual  method  of  filming,  are 
checked  below. 


□  Coloured  covers/     i 
Couverture  de  coul|ur 


n 
n 


Covers  damaged/ 
Couverture  endommagte ' 

Covers  restored  and/or  lam 
Couverture  restauree  et/ou  pelliculie 


inatei^ 


Cover  title  missing/ 

Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 

Coloured  maps/ 

Caites  gtographiques  en  couleur 


»      I — ^  Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blu«  or  blackl/ 
I I  Encr'e  de  couleur  (i.e.  autre  que  bleue  ou  noire) 

□  Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


-*.<■:,. 


D 

1.,    " 

D 
□ 


n 


/  .  .■,■.■-■ 

Bound  with  other  material/  .\ 

Relie  avec  d'autres  documents  " 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  reliure  serrte  peut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  de  la  marge  interieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may  appear 
within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these  have 
been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajouties 
lors  d'une  restauration  apparaissent  dans  le  texte, 
mais,  lorsque  tela  etait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  etc'f  ilmees. 


Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supptementaires: 


This  item  is  filmMl  at  the  reductioi^  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  f  ilme  au  taux  de  ripduction  indique  ci-dessous. 


L'Institut  a  microf  ilmA  le  meilleur  exemplaire  qu'il 
lui  a  k\k  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details  de  cet 
exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-Atre  uniques  dii  point  de  vue 
bibiiographique.  qui  peuvent  modifier  una  image 
reproduite.  ou'qui  peuvent  exiger  une  modification 
dans  la  mithode  normale  de  filmage  sont  indiqufe 
ci-dessous. ,  < 

EiFj  Coloured  pages/ 
_|  Pages  de  couleur 

□  Pages  damaged/.  ^ 

Pages  endommagtes 

□  Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Pages  restaurees  et/ou  pellicultes 


i 


C^; 


ages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 
Pages  decolorees,  tachetees  ou  diquees 


r~~|  Pages  detached|^ 


Pages  detaches 


QShowthrough/ 
Transparence 

j      'I'Quality  of  print  varies/ 

I  ^\  Qualite  inegale  de  I'impression 


n 


Continuous  pagination/ 
Pagination  continue 


* 


I     "kfncludes  index(es)/ 

I 1 1  Comprend  tin  (des)  index>^ 

Title  on  header  taken  from:  / 
Le  titre  de  I'en-tSte  provient: 

□  Title  page  of  issue/ 
Page  de  titre  de  la  livraison  ^ 

□  Caption  of  issue/ 
Titre  de  depart  de  la  livraison 


D 


Masthead/ 

Generique  (peribdiques)  de  la  livraison 


l^i}- 


10X 

» 

14X 

\ 

18X 

22X 

/           26X 

30X 

' 

* 

y 

/ 

■s 

12X                                 16X                                 20X 

■•r 

28X 

32  X 

1 


The  copy  filmed  here  has  b««ji  reproduced  thanks 
to  the  Ijenarosity  of:  / 

♦      Metropolitan  Toronto  Reference  Library 
Business  and  Social  Sciences  Deparcmenc 

The  images  appeafing  hfra  are  the  best  quaUty 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibiliry 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specif iOatJona. 


Original  copies  in  printed  peper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  ar\d  ending  on 
the  last  page  with  a  printed  or  il^tj^strsted  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  agp'ropriate.  All 
other'original  copies.are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche. 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — *^  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbpi'^V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


L'exemplaire  filni^  fut /fproduJt  gricii  A  la 
g4nArostt6  de: 

Metropolitan  Toronto  Reference  Library 
Business  and  Social  Sciences  Department 


Les  images  suivantes  ont  At*  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  9oirf«compte  tenu  de  la  Condition  at 
de  la  nenete  dsi  I'exemplaire  film*,  et  en 
conformite  avec  les  conditiona  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 

Lep  exemplair«s  orlginaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimee  sont  filmis  en  JBpmmancant 
par  le  premier  plat  et  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dermere  page  qui  comporte  une  etrlpreinre 
d'impression  ou  d'iliustration.  soit  par  le. second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les.autree  exempiairjos 
originaux  sont  filmie  en  commoncant  par  la 
premiere  pege  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impression  ou  d'iliustration  et  en  terminant  par 
la  derni^re  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  apparaltra  sur  la 

derniire  image  de  chaque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbole  -»^  signifie  "A  SUIVRE   ,  le 
symbols  V  signifie  "FIN". 


<^, 


%■ 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  moy  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed  .. 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The'following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method:  ,.  , 


1 

2 

.3 

« 

m 


■♦* 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc.,  peuvent  itre 
film^'s  6  des  taux  de  reduction  diff^rents 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un'seul  ciich*,  il  est  film*  d  partir 
de  Tangle  sup*rieur  gauche,  de  gauche  d  droite, 
9X  C9  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  n*cessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
illustrent  la  methode. 


t 

,-    • 
I            ■      ■  ■      '         . 

A 

2 

3 

1                                                            *               .       .        ■ 

/                                                                                                                                             ■       ■            ■    ;    '   '-f'^ 

■ 

■ 

4 

5 

e 

6 

.■:V       ■        ■Mr--- 

\ 

4 

■» 

,         -      -          /.        ;!.■.      -      .    •. 

\ 

fill 


i 


/ 


'W' 


/ 


ll  h 

t 

'■ 

.#■ 

■'  -■  ■ 

.  ■- 

■^ 

ifi 

^ " 

1!  '■^'  -' 

'  ■          ^>.             ' 

J       "V 

'>■•. 

"  sSi 

m  : 

'       '     .•%c..J^ 

-■_ 

/ 

• 

J  * 

■■  •• -> 

■  ■.     -       ( 

■   * 

■.^..   ; 

ill   " 

■    ,if/**r^^?^ 

^1^ 

*.,  ■       _ .  .'l.. 

^  >i  _  ;^ ■    ;■.      ,  _   .  _. 

■-                      ■      \      -    ■ 

.           -^       -         :■     -   -;r-:,-^ 

W}-  • 

--.f-^  -'^ 

^^r 

r  < 

•V    ■  A,. 

• 

"■  ■  «' 

RrT 

i;:,^'Cl 

P^?S 

»•■ 

'^  •■..■■  v     ■-".;•• . 

■■'■.,.     '  '  .   \  .  ; 

^^H^m. 

-.1.    .,:>■,, ^,r        .• 

^  ^  ■■ '■  ..Jr 

■     ■      • 

91 


^\\e  collar  bolts  c6nnect  tliu  l)rat'ket8  between  tlic  tran- 
soms and>trail,  their  collars  keeping  it  rigid. 

The  trail  piece  lies  between  the  brackets  at  the  point, 
and  rivets  pass  throngh  the  whole.  This  piece  eiids  in  an 
eye,  to  go  on  to  the  limber  hoyk,.aud  is  steeled  to  prevent 
wearing. 

A  bearing  piece  of  steel  is  bolted  nndeV  the  end,  and  a 
plate  is  bolted  above  to  prevent  damage,  if  the  limber  ia 
driven  over  it.  ^     » 

The  axle-tree  bed  is  of  wr;^nght/iron,  and  forms,  with 
the  axle,  a  beam  of  box-girder  section. 

The  axle-ti*ee  forms  •  the  bottom/ of  the  box,  a-^'picce  of 
angle  iyon  rrveted^along  each  side  of  tliebody  the  sides, 
•while  the  top  is  formed  by  a  plate  riveted  along  the  npper 
sides  of  the  angle  iron  pieces.  The  whole  is  fixed  into 
recesses  in  the  brackets.  Avliere  it  is  secured  by  being  rivet- 
ed, to  the  frames  of  the  latter,  by  angle  iron  stays  riveted 
to  itself  in  rear  and  ^o  the  frames,  and  by  tensile  stays, 
from  the  shoulders  of  the  axle-tree,  to  the  same. 

A  strengthening  fplate  is  riveted  on  the  inside  of  each 
bracket,  extending  from  tlie  bed  to  the  rear  transom. 

The  carriage  is  fitted  w^ith  capsquftres  and  keys,  metal 
sockets  to  receive  the  trunnions  of  the  elevating  gear,  a  hand- 
spike  ring,  trail  handles,  range  plate,  and  a  lot  of  other  small 
ones. 

The  elevating  screw,  which  is  known  as  the  Wli  it  worths 
pattern,  Plate  VIII.,  is  attached  to  the  gun  in  the  usual 
way  by  a  bolt  and  is  worked  by  a  metnl*nut  through  whi{;h 
it  passes.  Bevel  teeth  are  cut  upon  the  •  lower  part  of  the 
nut,  into  which  a  bevel  wheel  upon  a  horizontal  spindle 
gears.  The  nut  and  bevel  wheel  are  contained  in  a  wronght- 
iron  box,  having  a  trunnion  upon  each  side,  by  which  it  is 
supported  and  can  oscillate  between  the  brackets.  The  lid 
of  the  box  is  secured  to  the  bottom  ,by  four  long  screws  and 
has  a  lubricating  hole  in  it  for  oiling  the  bevel  wheels 
through,  which  hole  is  filjled  by  a  metal  screw  to  keep  dust 
and  grit  out ;  a  drip  hole  is  made  in  the  bottom  and  the 


h. 


% 


5i;crf')t':z^^.<^G7 


-'36t. 


,*• 


*V, 


•■  jf 


i^  v'* 


■■'•«[ 


SepT  2  6  1910  Z^*: 


S3:523:- 


PPRESENTED  BY   ^ 


N'l 


/2^tjc^  (3^/Le^ 


*     7^v  ^y**-^**«— <- 


^  <3 


oa 


r^ 


interior  is  coated  with  red  I6nd,  The  spindle  of  tlio  Level 
•wheel  passes  through  a  metal  bearing  or  honeh  in  the  right 
trunnion  of  tho  box  and  upon  its  extremity  outside  the 
right  bracket  of  the  carriage  has  a  metal  hand  wheel  by 
whicU  it  is  worked.  To  removp  the  box  from  tlio  carriago 
tho  lid  has  to  be  taken  off,  the  pin  holding  the  spindlo 
pulled  out,  and  the  spindle  withdrawn.  The  second  tran- 
som of  the  carriage  has  then  to  be  removed,  after  which 
the  bolts  of  the  sockets  being^tiken  out,  the  box  with  the 
sockets  can  be  moved  to  the  front,  and  the  former  freed 
from  the  latter.  :    I  - 

*•  The  axle-tree  boxes  are  arranged  to  carry  two  rounds  of 
case  and  small  stores.  The  lijtl  serves  as  a  seat  whpn  re- 
quired.    The  boxes  form  seats,  with  back  and  foot  rests. 

The  limber  is  also  chiefly  of  iron.  It  is  formed  of  three 
futchells,  a  splinter  bar  with  two  stays,  a  platform  board,  a 
slat,  an  axle-tree  bed  witli^  limber  hook,  axle-tree  and 
wheels.    . 

The  splinter  bar  is  of  plate  iron,  bolted  to  the  futchells 
and. strengthened  by  a  stay  of  round  iron  from  the  extrem- 
ities to  the  axle-tree  bed. 

The  axle-tree  bed  is  deeper,  but  of  lighter  construction 
than  that  tor  the  gun.  The  futchells  of  tee  iron  are  let 
into  the  bed,  below  the  top  plate. 

The  limber  hook  has  three  long  arms,  by  which  it  is  rivet- 
ed to  and  also  held   at  the  proper  distance  from  the  rear^f^- 
the  bed.     It  is  steeled. 

The  platform  board  of  asli,  and  foot  board  of  elm,  are 
placed  on  top,  and  fastened  to  the  futchells.  The  slat  is 
placed  in  front,  between  the  splinter  bar  and  foot  board. 

The  shafts  are  the  field  shafts  off  and  'near,  of  ash.  The 
off  shaft  has  the  part  bet ween%pl inter  bar  and  axle-tree,  of 
iron,  to  give  room  for  the  wheel  to  work,  it  being  fastened 
for  ordinary  draught  outside  the  wheel. 

The  limber  is  fi.tted  for  either  single,  double,  treble  or 
bullock  draught. 


Limber 
Murk  II. 


A-  ■. , 


F^ 


KEFEl 


"An 
mandu 


.^tL^ 


■  #     .      '     » 


■  FACTS  AND  THEORIES 


AS  TO   A 


FUTUKE  STATE: 


1) 


THE  SClllPTUllE  DOCTRINE  CONSIDERED, 


■WITH 


n?=- 


KEFEllENCEfifcllKUENT  DENIALS  OF  ETERNAL  PUNISHMENT. 


By  F.  W.  grant. 


> 


"And  this  is  love,  that  w«  wiuk  aftor  His  commandments.    This  is  the  com- 
mandment, that,  as  ye  have  heard  from  the  beginniu-,  ye  should  walk  in  it." 

-i  John  6. 


I> 


NEW  YORK: 
M.  CATHCART,  20  FOURTH  AVENUE. 

•        TOllONTo.  t'AXADA: 
S.  W.  HALLOWS,  308  YONGE  STREET. 

" IS79^ — : 


'■iS.-  .<?.-■■;    '}■: 


Pri 
Int 


li^l'  ^'A  -; 


r\iA 


i: 


PBINT 


Paym-     i^woriiKWS.     „ 

K«S.  KI.KrTin.T^I-KUS  ANL  STI:UK..TY1'KRS, 

■•,7    VMIK    11"^*  •    '•^■^^'   '»"'f'^- 

I. 


4*J 


■      J 

1-1 


X 


X 


o  ( )  N^  T  K  :n  t  s  . 


Prkfack..  .   . . 

INTIOMM  (   I  ION 


VAOE 


K(I|{M>       «•!•      Dl.NlAL     OF      EtKIINAL 
1*1  N  IMIMKNT 

PAirr  I  —MAX   AS  IlK  IS. 


CFrAPTKU. 

I.— Is  Tin;  JJoDV  Ai.i,?. 19' 

II.— Man  a  Tkium:  Bkinm;.  .      .  ....  29 

I II. — Th i:  Sim i;'it  of  (iou. .    -         .  .  .  Sfj 

I\'.^ — Tin;  Si'iinr  OF  Man  ... ....  44' 

\'.-  Tin;  Son. .    . ,.  53 

\'l         Fl  .NrTIoNs  AND    ItKFATlONSHir.s  oF    SoUL 

ANi>  Sim  KM. ,-. \  .  6vi 

A'll. — Soul  ANi>  Ski.i'.  ^ .  72 

VIII— TiiF  Fall         '  ...  80 

IX.— M^an}^  I{fl\tion.<iiii' To  (Iou.  . 88 

^*Airr  ir.— DEATH  AND  the  ixteilmediate 

STATE. 

X.^ — Dlatii .^.  ......  ^-i.  ...  ..     88 

.      XL— 'CoxsciorsNFss  altfu  DLyriL— I 99 

XII.  CoN.si  ioi:.-i\Fsj  aftjik  Dlatii. —2  ....  .  .  112 

XIII.- -()i5.n:<TioNs  FROM  Tin:  OldTlstamknt.  .  124 
XIV. — SiiLoL,  IIadls  and  Tauvdisk  .  .  .(U.  ....  144 

PAUT  III.     THE  ETEUXAl/lSSUES.^ 

X\'.      TlIK  AVTirolilTY  AVI)  USL  OF  SCU11'Tri{F.\   153 . 

XVI.     [mmoktality  :    N  w  Conditional?  .  .  .  ^'102 
XATI.   -Etkkxal  Lifh:  What  is  it':'.    ........  169 

XVIII.  -Thk  FiusT  Shntlncl .  .  .  .180 

XIX. — Dfstki'ctiox,  and  its  Klndkld  Tlums. — 

TiiF  OldTlstamkxt..  ■  ■  ■ 187 


.^Jr 


M-  ^. 


r<?>T'»'V«f-/5,'«^.'<.".'ll!!WpK?« 


E?-  n 


<?• 


!v 

(JHAr»TEK. 
XXI- 

XXIL- 
XXIII- 
XXIV- 

XXV- 
XXVI- 

XXVII- 

XXVIII.- 

.      XXIX.- 
XXX.- 
.       XXXL 
,    XXXII. 
XXXIII- 
XXXIV. 
XXXV. 
XXXVI. 

XXXVII 

XXXVIII 


CO  STENTS. 


rA(iK 


-AFtHTnr-;*iSrKVi:Y  uv  TfiK  Scumrui: 


Tkkms.  .; •  -  -'^* 

-Til K 'MiKi^^iiv-iM^i^fe^i-/-  >■• •-•■■•  •■'-^fLj ■• 

-TulfPURlFICAVTIO^    \^V    KLKSsfKa    OF     -  jW 

-Till-  Xkw  Ti:sTAMi%  r^i'^Tiox  of  tiik 
-TnK  Ni;\YTK^AMKNTSriyi'trKHs  .v?^Tu 

TllK  .IriMlMlvNT  OF    qp-^WUlM.l)    .  .      .270 

-Tin;  K):!>i;nui;rTiH^)p^^ift'>^K>^'i"-  •  •  • 
-JiixJMK^S^f:  WhkAnI^^jiat?  .,  .  .  . 
-Tin:  Doom  v'i'  Satan  \  •  •      •  •  •  •  •  ^  •  •  •  • 

-Gkiienna  ......  ^-  •.•."; K^.  •';^'^'V.'  '■■.■    f- 

-Tin:  AiMMAi.vi'Ti<%Vi>»loNs.-i-V^-,y        S 

-Tin:  Ai'ot  .vi.vpTK  Vi%ox^:-^:i>^   ,      ^ 

-Tin:  AiM)(  Ai.^  itk  Vi.sruNH?--')r 

-•'  EVKKLASTINO  Vl-NISIImI^T   '  I  N  >I  ^Tl"- 

XXV.  •  •  -■  ^     v.-.  ^  .  .  .    -i-l'* 

^••Tm:  (Josi'KL  OF  Moim:'  ....    -i^^ 


'■ 


•■•I  i^i^ 


300 
30;") 
319 
33H 
3r>0 


—  AsNnilLI>T-H»'lOUATH.M: 


M 


^-M  n. 


DlNN'S 


Thkoiiy 


XXXIX.—"  Tin:  l{i:sTiTUTro 

,1 


v  OF  Ai.L  Thinos.",— 


Mu.  .11  Ki:s 


XL. "Tin:  l{i:<rnrri<'N  oi   Ai.i. 'rinNos.'— 

Cand.s  Fauiiau  . 

XLI.— Mk.  Kii:ks'  Vii:\v ...  • 

XLII  — Tin:  Etiik  Ai.A2ii:>rioN     • 

XIJII.— La.-T  Wo'uDS^VCnri   ANNlinLlTlONISTS.  . 

XLIV.-  I  v>T  WoKDs  unii  Ui;.«^TouATi(»\i.vis.  . . 


3Sl 


30( 


41.") 
4:M 

4  so 

4SS 


■1 


91 


*>»■■■ 


ui; 

■OF     ■  J'W    ' 


...  .  !iy(#- 

II  i: 

.  .  .  2(50 

.  .  .  270     " 
.  . .  2h;{ 
.  . .  291 
. .  .  300 

■  *..  ■ 
^.   319  ° 

33H 
^      3r>0 

\'ri'. 

v.  h:}') 

M  u. 
...  3S1 

.  jy 

.  . .  397 


...  4i:. 
.  .  .  .  431 
.  .  .  .  4;M 

STS.  .  4  so 
rs.  . .  4sS 


•■•I  -<^ 


■^ 


^'  A-- 

r 

■4.  ■ 

•  'Vt' 

/ 

v 

■.^^-. 

J. 

.    ■* 

■^.v       " 

»■/ 

i>iih: 

■M^\.^ 

)E. 

' 

^    M 

• 

^ 

4v 


.c^'i.;^■;•4 


J* 


.*■*■ 


■■^i 


"if—" 


TnK  present  warUjii  llu'  <levelojfmt»uV  of  one  publishetl 
some  years  ngo,  niul  now  otft^  of  print,  l)ut  which  toolc  Up 
only  .1  j)ortion  of  the  snhject  here  eon.sidered,  and  at  iftnoh* 
leK8  lenjifth.  TTtr?  rapid  spread  of  the  views  in  que.«iti9lv/*thefr 
varkpty  and  their  importance,  render  a  prolonged  and  patient 
examination  of  them  ahsohiteiy  necessari'.  ^^'Tltti  .qiiestion 
has  become  one  of  the  leading  (juestions  of  the  'day*,  and 
nothing  sliort  of  an  extended  api)eal  to  Scripture  will 
satisfy  the  need  of  those  entangled  by  the  error,  or  of  those 
who  may  be  In  danger  of  beeomiiig  entangled. 

For  others  also,  (piite  outside  of  these,  the  ca,reful  exam- 
ination of  Scripture  upon  a  subject  of  such  deep  interest 
will  be  foun<l  very  far  from  uiiprotitable.  'I,E^'^^^  ^^A  whole 
is  so  connected^  in  its  various  parts,  that  we  cannot  appre- 
hend any  one  of  these  more  fully,  without  this  leading  us  to 
a.ljiller  apprehension  of  many  other  points  in  which  kindred 
triiths  touch  this.  While  th<*  perfection  and  profundity  of 
the  wonl  of  God  will  more  an<l  more  be  reali/AMl.as  vts 
abilitv  is  j>roved  to  satisfv  the  real  need  of  the  soul  and 
ijieet  the  natural  thoughts  and  questions  of  the  mind.     ^ 

Scripture  thus  proved  will  be  its  own  best  evidence  as  a 
Divine  revelation.  Xo  doubt  there  is  abundance  of  exter- 
nal witness  to  its  truth;  but  the  surest  of  all  is  its  own 
direct  testimony  to  man\  heait  Oi^ud  conscience. — Without 


e 


PREFACK. 


Scripture  he  is  au  enigma  which  his  own  wit  cannot  explain  : 
he  knows  not  from  whence  he  came  or  whither  he  is  going  ■ 
he  knows  neither  .himself  nor  God.  With  Scripture,  "  light 
is  come  into  the  world;"  and  what  makes  all  things  mani- 
fest needs  not,  although  it  everywhere  finds,  a  testimony 
outside  itself.  Truth  speaks  for  itself  -"  commends  itseW 
to  every  man's  conscience  in  the  sight  of  God  "-although 
the  true  it  is  who  alone  will  hear  it. 

In  the  following  pages,  then,  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  is 
what   is   first  examined,  not  merely  negatively  an   answer 
sought  to  certain  views.  -The  statement  of  the  trut,h  is  the 
only  proper  answer  to  the  error.     This  the  writer  has  sought 
everywhere  to  keep  in  mind,  while  yet  endeavoring  to  meet 
whatever  has  been  advanced  on  the  other  side  as  fully  as 
possible.     Especial    attention   has   naturally  been  given  to 
certain  writers  who  are  most  prominently  identified   witli 
the  theory  of  annihilation  oh  the  one  han<l,  or  of  universal 
salvation  in 'its  various  modiHcations  upon  the  other ;  and 
they  are  allowed  to  speak  for  the,  most  i)art  in  their  own 
words,  and  at  sufficient  length  to  ensure  that  there  shall 
be  no  doubt  or  mistake  as  to  the  views  they  hold.     Among 
these,  Mr.  Constable  has  challenged  criticism  of  his  argu- 
ments, and  to  him  I  have  naturally  sought  the  more  fully  to 
reply.     To- the  arguments  of  Mr.  Roberts  also,  the  present 
leader  of  the  Christadelphian  body,  who  has   printed   an 
extended' examination  of  my  original   volimie,  "  Life    and 
Immortality,"  I  have  necessarily  devoted  considerable  space. 

May  the  Lord  in  His  pity  and  love  to  souls,  for  whom  He 
has  died,  be  pleased  to  use  these  pai^es  for  the  blessing  ol 
manv.  and  to  His  ow?»  trlory  ! 


t  explain : 
is  going; 
re,  "  light 
ngs  mani- 
testimony 
nds  itself 
-although 

jripture  is 
III   answer 
uth  is  the 
has  sought 
liX  to  moot 
as  fully  as 
I  givon  to 
itit'd   with 
universal 
>ther ;  and 
their  own 
here  shall 
Among 
i*  his  argu- 
)T0  fully  to 
he  present 
printed   an 
"  Lit«}    and 
•a])le  space. 
r  whom  He 
blessing  ol 


INTRUDUCTION 


FOIIMS  OF  TIIK  DKNIAL  UF  KTERNAh  PlINISII^fE>^T. 

In'  entering  upon  a  subject  like  the  present,  it  will  be\ 
desirable  in  the  first  place  to  get  as  clear  a  view  as  possible 
of  what  is  involved,  the.  questions  it  is  proposed  to  answer. 
The  denial  of  eternal  punishment  has  two  main  forms,  that 
of  annihilationism,  or,  as  solaie  prefer  to  call  it  now,  "condi- 
tional immortality,'*  and  that  of  the  final  restoration  and 
salvation  of  all  men.  Of  these  two  there  are  again  several 
mpdifications,  and  even  (contradictory  of  one  another  as 
they  may  seem)  amalgamations.  Each  of  these  we  must 
Iwiefly  notice. 

Annihilationism  is  at  the  present  moment  very  widely 
spread,  and  there  are  perhaps  few  Christians  who  have  not 
in  some  shape  or  other  already  met  with  it.     It  is  a  dish 
dressed  up  by  skilful  hands  to  suit  very  different  tastes. 
From  Dr.  Leask  and  the  various  writers  in  the  "  Rainbow  " 
to  the  editor  and  contributors  to  the  Ghristadelphian ;  from 
Mr.  Morris,  late  of  Philadelphia,  to  Miles  Grant  and  the 
Adventists  of  various  grades,  it  is  found  in  association  with 
very  distinct  and  very  opposite  systems  of  doctrine,  from 
Trinitarianism  down  to  the  lowest  depths  of  Socinian  and 
materialistic  infidelity.     But,  on  this  very  account,  it  will  be^ 
well  to  look  at  it,  not  only  in  itself  but  in  its  associations, 
to  lead  the  minds  of  those  who,  meeting  it  in  more  dec§nf, 
form,  may  be  in  danger  from  its  plausible  sophistries,  to  ap^' 
prebend  what  it  naturally  connects  itself  witfi  and  prepares 


;    IJSTTRODUCTIOK. 


- 


4* 


the  way  for ;  and,  mt)reover,  to  arouse  the  minds  of  Christians 
in  general  to  a  ^ense  of  the  practical  beariijg  anfl  results  of 
an  evil  which  is  spreadinfij  rapidly,  and  lifting  up  its  head  in 
ttnlooked  for  places. 

This  may  bo  my  justification,  if  I  should  lead  my  rea<lers 
into  the  examination  of  points  which  for  the  ChristiaR  may 
be   deemed   unnecessary,  and    speak   too   of  things  which 
rightly  shock  his  sensibilities  as  such;      Moreover,  I  do  it 
because   upon    any   j)oint    whatever,    where    Scripture    is 
appealed  to,  it  is  due  to  those  whose  minds  might  be  injuri- 
ously aifected  by  the  mere  sfemhuj  to4lecline  such  an  appeal. 
My  desire  is,  God  helping  nie,  to  meet  the  hontsL  need  of 
minds  unexercised  in-  the  subtleties  presented  to  them,  too 
often  with  a  skill  which,  .alas,  shows  in  whose  hands  these 
poor  annihilationists   are  Hm\i  itting  instruihents.      And  if, 
in  so  doinir,  the  verv  foiindations  of  our  faith  should  have  to 
be  examined  (and  they  can  sustain  no  harm  by  it),  it  may  at 
feast  (I  repeat)    serve'  to  convince?  my  readers  of  what  is 
brought   in   question   by   a  false  system,  which  is  helping 
to  rfpen  fast  the  i)redicted  eyil  of  the  later  days. 

To  come  now  to  the  point  in  liand.  AYe,  have  a  number 
of  steps  to  take  before  we  reach  the  lowest  level  of  so- 
called  Christadelphianlsm.  ]\raterialisin  is  indeed  its  inev- 
itable tendency ;  yet  a  large  number  of  those  now  holding  it 
are  by  no  means  materialists,  as  Edw.  White,  Heard,  Maude, 
.Morris,  Dobncy,  etc.  On  the  other  haml,  ^Nfr.* Constable  is 
tlie  leatlpr  of  a  very  ]»r(>n»»um-ed  njaterialistic  section  of  this 
sdipol  (which  we  may  call  the  Trinitarian^school  of  annihi- 
lationism),  and  with  whom,  though  differing  in  many  ways. 
General  Goodwyn  fiifds  his  jdaee.  The  *  Adventist "'  school, 
on  the  other  hand,  with  some  exceptions,  are  not  only  ma-" 
terialistic  but  anti-Trinitariai>  also  :  to  these  belong  Hudson, 
Hastings*  and  Miles  (irant.  Christadelj)hianism  is  all  this 
and  more,  a  system  in  Avhieh  no  clement  of  real  Christianity 


Messrs.  Hiitlson  and  llustini^s  are  l<>  s(»iin'  «\\l«'ii(  «'.\f»'|»iiori.s. 


-X- 


1 
i 


r. 


■■■I 


I- 


t^:. 


iNTkODUCTlOy. 


V 


Christians 

results  of 

its  head  in 

r.y  rea<lers 
istiaH.  may 
iigs  which 
LT,  I  do  it 
ripture    is 

be  injuri- 
an  appeal. 
;:  need  of 

them,  too 

inds  these 

And  if, 

Id  have  to 

it  may  at 
)f  what  is 
is  helping 

a  number 
I'el  of  so- 
l  its  inev- 
holding  it  ' 
1,  Maude, 
iistable  is 
)u  of  this 
>f  annihi- 
my  ways, 

■'  school, 
only  ma-'^ 

Hudson, 
s  ail  this 
ristianity 

lit  ions. 


remains  behind.     They  liuve  riglitly,  therefore,  given  up  the 
name  of  Christian.       ^         ! 

The  psychological  (iues|iou  is  that  upon  which  these 
writers  diil'er  most  among  [themselves.  "  Some  believe  in  a 
true  trichotomy  of  body,  j soul  and  spirit,  as  Mr.  Ueard; 
some  are  dichotomists,  believing  the  spirit  to  be  superadded 
in  the  case  of  the  regenefate,  as  Morris  of  Philadelphia; 
most  are,  as  already  said,  matei-ialists  wholly.  I  shall  notice 
briefly  the  main  distinctions  on  these  points.  ■    ' 

1.  And  first  as  to  the  spirit  of  man.     Mr.  Heard  in  his 
"Tripartite  Nature  of  3Iaii  "  maintains  its  substantive  exist- 
ence in  all  men,  as  that  which  implies  "  God-consciousness," " 
which  the  brute  has  not.     In  the  unconverted  it  is  deadened 
and  inert,  but  quickened  by  the' Spirit^of  God  when  we  are 
born  again.     With  him,  as  to  the  latter  part  of  this,  Mr. 
•  White  agrees,  although  he  can  speak  of  "  the  royal  qualities 
of  spirit,  whatever  tiny  may  be  "  (!)  /y^  a  queen-bee,  "  which 
incite  or  enable  ber  to  takejthe  lead  in  migrations  or  swarm- 
ings,''  (!!)  so  that  for  him  j^can  scarcely  imply  what  it  does 
for  Mr.  Heard,  and  its  possession  or  not  by  man  would  seem 
to  be  of  very  small  account.*     He  allows  it  to  be,  however, 
in  him  "  of  a  superior  order,  as  '  the  candle  of  the  Lord;  ' 
he  has  more  wisdom  than  the  beasts  of  the  field;  neverthe. 
less  he  shares  spirit  with  all  animated  uatures.'f 

Mr.  Morris,  oirlhe  other  hand,  believes  that  the  new  na- 
ture communicated  in  regeneration  is  alone  "  spirit "  in  the 
proper  sense.  The  word  is  used  as  to  ilie  mn-egenerate  only 
for  the  "  motions  and  emotions  of  the  soul."  Li  Eccl.  xii.  f 
he  thinks  rnach  should  ratherbe"breath,"orif  not,  «  it  may 
be  used  to  signify  the  motion  of  the  soul  in  passing  away ' 
and  passing  into  the  custody  of  God ! ''+ 

Passing   downwards   towards   the   naked  materialism  in 
^which  this  doctrine  ends,  we  find  General  Goodwyn  also  main- ' 
taining  the  addition  of  the  spirit  to  man  in  regeneration 
only.^  ^  ^       . 


*Lifr  in  Chris},,  p    18 f  P-  ol  ~    %   WhalTs  U:m%  pp.  m;^^, 

%  Tn  liis  "  Iloloklpri.-i."  * 


r-.g4jyiK.M:^  Jt-^Sj^^  f?he\£!j 


10 


INTKODUCTION. 


Jt 


Mr.  Constable's  doctrine,  gravitating  evidently   toward* 
♦Christadelphianism,"  is  that  the  "spirit  "  {riiaeh  or  neaha- 
nah)\n  man  is  the  Spirit  of  God,  yet  it  is  identified  by 
iim  also  with  the  ''breath  of  life;  "  the  cause  of  animation 
to  th^  body.*      God   withdraws    this   at  death,   and    the 
man  breaks  up  an^  dissolves  away.    This  view  Mr.  Warleigh 
(whoto  Mr.  White  stj^les  "  an  able  and  resolute  thinker  ") 
ha«  adopted,  differing  "only  in  this — that  in  the  case  of 
Christian  believers,  the  Spirit,  which  he  describes   as   the 
Spirit  of  Gody  becomes  according  to  him  a  disthict  individ- 
ual spirit  of  the  man  separable  from  the  soul ;  and  he  thinks 
that  this  "SpiritL"  with  all  the  attributes  of  an  individual 
'  r&ind,   survives  in  paradise  till  the  resurrection,  when  it 
riyoins  soul  and  body  at  the  Lord's  coming. t 
w'  i^otmany  degrees  below  this  comes  .the  materialism  of  a 
certain  class  of  A(Iventists,  who  maybe  fitly  represented  by 
the  editor  of  the  '[  World's  Crisis,"  Miles  Grant,  of  Boston, 
Mass.     He  deniesi  that  the  spirit  is  other  than  the  breath  in 
man,  and  that  it  is  "  the  thtoking  accoufttable  part,  or  that 
it  ever  did  or  over  will  thinK."J     And  this  leads  him  to  the 
denial   of  the   personality  of  the  Spirit  of  God  also.     He 
i  1     ■       says  :^  "2.  The  Word  spirit .  is  used  to  denote  an  influence 

proceeding />om  a  being.  Hence  we  read  of  the  Gomfort;,er 
or  Holy  Spirit,  that  *  it  proceedeth  from  the  Father.'  In 
mesmeric  operations  there  is  a  spirit  proceeding  from  the 
operator  to  his  subject,  by  means  of  which  he  controls  him. 
All  men  and  animals  e.xert  this  influence  more  or  less.'' 

All  Adventist  aiinihilationists  are  not  as  gross  as  this. 
Messrs.  Hudson  anct  Hastings,  for  instance,  are  not  material- 
ists to  this  extent  evidently,  although  in  the  same  boat  with 
those  that  are.  Messrs.  Ellis  and  Read,  in  a  book  which  has 
gone  through  at  least  six  pditidns,  on  the  other  hand,  are  as 
oui-spoken  as  IMiles  Grant.     They  lay  down  these  propo- 

ffluons  :||       _^  1  . ' 

•  In  hia  treatise  on  "  Hades." 

XU"ot«d  from  "  !''<"<*  in  Christ,"  p.  298,  n.    \  Spirit  in  Man,  pp.  31 ,  ."52 
— ^ib.  pi. !|  Bible  4-  Tradition,  pp.  13.  84-87. 


'f-r 


tly  towardfl 
ch  or  neaha- 
ilentified  by 
>f  animation 
h,  and  the 
[r.  Warleigb 
e  thinker  ") 
he  case  of 
Ibes  as  the 
net  individ- 
id  he  thinks 
I  individual 
an,  when  it 

riallHm  of  a 
resented  by 
of  Boston, 
le  breath  in 
art,  or  that 
him  to  the 
.  also.     He 
n  influence 
Gomfort;,er 
'ather.'     In 
J   from  the 
ntrols  him. 
•  less/' 
ss  as  this, 
t  material- 
boat  with 
;  which  has 
and,  are  as 
Bse  propo- 


n.pp.  31,.'}2 


INTBODUOTION. 


11 


^ 


Fmt,  we  BhaU  prove  from  tlie  Bible  the  corporeal„lieing  and 
mortahty  of  the  soul,  and  the  nature  of  the  spirit  of  man,  which 
spirit,  not  being  a  living  entity,  is  neither  mortal  nor  immortal 
"f"<^^  (spirit)  is  derived  hom^uah,  ito  blow,' and  nesme,* 

to  breathe  (!)  pnmarily  si-nifies  'wind,  air,  breath';  but  it  is 
sometimes  used  to  signify  a  principle,  having  some  relation  to/ 
electricity,  diffused  through  universal  space,  a  principle  thai 
stimulates  the  organs  of  men  and  animals  into  activitv,  and  which 
18  used  by  the  animals  themselves  to  control  their  voluata^ 
motions.  .  .  .  This  principle,  being  the  principle  of  life  in  all 
features,  is  in  the  hands  of  God  and  controlled  by  Him,  hence  in 
Him  we  live  and  move  and  have  our  being  ;  and  God  is  the  God 
of  the  spints  of  all  flesh  ;  when  God  taketh  away  His  Spirit  and  * 
His  hrenth-i.  e..  God's   Spirit  and  God's  breath-then  man 
retumeth  to  his  earth  and  his  thoughts  perish. "  " 

From  this  it  is  scarcely  a  step  down  to  Christadelphianism 
the  system  of  the  late  Dr.  Thomas  and  his  followers.     Their 
views  have  been  little,  if  at  all,  noticed  by  any  who  have 

taken  m  hand  to  reply  to  annihllatlonist  doctrine  ;t  yet  there 
IS  reason  to  believe  they  are  spreadmg,  not  only  in  the 
United  States,  but  also  in  Britain,  where  mdeed,  their  first 
originator  had  birth.  The  system  is  acknowfedged  in  the 
Utle  page  of  a  book  that  lies  before  me,  by  Mr.  Roberts  of 
Birmmgham,  England,  their  present  leader,  to  be  "opposed 
to  the  doctrines  of  all  the  names  and  denominations  of 
Christendom.  They  adopt  professedly  an  Old  Testament 
basis  and  deny  almost  all  that  is  distmctive  in  the  New  • 

d/J'' '^.^k'^i"  ^^''\*^"  personality  of  the  Spirit,  a  personal 
devil,andthe  heavenly portionof  the  saints.  ToquLfrom 
Mr.    Roberts'   book,t  they  believe    that    "  the   Father  is 

?  filr nftr  A^^'f ''^'  '^  ^"°  ^''  ^^  ^^^^i"  i°  the  creative 

iiocalization  of  His  will  power,  by  me^s^ofHis^MrepSr^ 

«nl^^r '"'^"  ^"^  ^  -^^^'^-'  ^-  ^^-^n^point  of 


t  Twelve  Lectures,  pp.  }H(),  140,  H",, 


which  fills  heaven  a.i.l  c-arth."     'Vhey  l.elieve  in  ''a  Lamb 
ol  Oro.l,  guileless  from  his  raten.it y\  and  yet  inheriting  the 
human  sm-nature  of  hi.s  nrotlur.  "     IJ„f,  being  free  from  ac- 
tual sm,  "  He  could  meet  all  the  elairL  of  Gorl's  law  upon 
that  nature,  anVl   yet   triumph  over  its  i,peration  l^y  a  resur- 
rection from  the  <lea.l."     Go.1  '-raised   Him  from  the  dead 
'       to^   g^ovioxxH    vx\^^uc^^  ,.y^^    to    equality  with   irimself" 
And  now  life  is  deposit  e.lhi  Him  for  our  acceptance,  on 
condition  of  our  allying  ourselves  Xu  Him,  yea,  on  condition 
of  our  entfy  mto  Him."      '  Baptism  in  water  is  the  cere- 
mony by  vvluc-h  believing  n,en  and  M'omen  are  united  with 
Christ,  and  constituted   heirs  of  11,..   life  everlasting,  which 
ile,  as  one  of  us,  has  punliase<\'  ,  '      ' 

In  this,  its  suited  home,  annihilati..n  tb.urilshes      <'  Spirit" 
IS,  according  to  Dr.  Thomas,  an  c-lement  <,f  the  atmosphere,  ■ 
e.^sting  ord.narily  <.ombine<I    ui.h   nitrogen    and    oxy-en 

'  II  rf/  'r'  V'^'^'r  •'  '^'  "'"^"*'"'  '"^•^^'"'  -"4iect;i3ty; 

con8t,t„te  the  breath  and  spirit  of  lives  of  all  Gpd'.^  livinn: 

souls.  *  I  =• 

Mr.  rif»l»erts  asks:—  }j 

.  ".^■^,'^t/^  tl^at  whi,.h  is  n.,t  m.tt.-.r?  It, will  W/ do  to  say 
ilrT:^  7  "'  ''^  '''^'V""  ""'^""^  ''^  "^  f^"«*  tl^«  Bible, 
a  rmghty  nisl„„.  .„,l.  ^n.!  .na.l.  tl..-  ph...  shak.,  ^howing  itf 
tobecapabl.of.,nc.e^anin:l  inomontum.  .-uul  therof^  as  much 
on  the  hst  of  material  forcos  as  Ii,d,t,  heat  and  .loctrieity.  Com 
mgnpon  Samson,  it  .n.r.nz,..!  his  museles  to  the)' snapping,  of 
ropes  like  thread  ;  an.l,  inhal..]  l.vth.  nostrils  of  ^n  a^d  be^ast 
It  gives  physical  lif..-'  |  "^^^' 

The  questions  as  to  the  spirit  are.  therc^re,its  beincr  or 
not  an  act,ialhving  entity  in  man;  its  function^;  and.'^on- 
nected  with  tins,  the  personality  of  the  Spirit  of  God 

2  As  to  the  soul  then-  is  still  considerably  y/iriety  of 
aoctrme.  Messrs.  White.  Heard,  Morris,  Maudd  and  others 
beheve  very  mueh  according  to  common  orthodoxy  of  the 


i  "a  Lamb 
eriting  the 
'e  from  ac- 
s  law  upon 
^(y  a  resur- 
»  the  dead 

Himself." 
'ptance,  on 
1  condition 

the  cere- 
nited  with 
ing,  which 

'^Spirit" 
rao8phere,  ' 

oxygen, 
lectricity, 
^(Vk  livinjr 


«lo  to  saj' 
the  Bible, 
tocost  like 
lowing  itf 
^  as  much 
y.  Com- 
ipping  of 
ind  beast, 

being  or 
and,  con- 
.d. 

triety  of 
d  others 
y  of  the 


INTRODUCTION. 


13 


soul,  and  of  ,t«  survival  too.     Mr.  Hudson  also*  admits  its 
mimatonahty,  although  he  supposes  it  to  be"  dependent  on 
embodiment   for   the   purposes   of  acfi.e  existenceJ   Mr 
lJobney_  recognizes    the  ;.-o/.,^>///^/   of   the  soul    beincr^n 
nature  distiiict  from  thel.ody,  but  doiiies  "  a  purely  .bsem 
bodied  coiidition.'t  '  1  "«'y  t«'8em- 

Ordinarily  for  common  n.atcrialism,  the  soul  is  the  animal 

,     life,    as  With  Mr.  Constal,let  dow.i  to  Mile.  Grant  &     It  is 

a  View  u-hkh  has  the  ni'erit  of  simplicity  at  least,  and  a  pa,'- 

^    tial  foundat.oii  .n  Scripture  also;  but  in  this  application  as 

falsehooT  '''^''''  "  "'""'  ^'"'''''  ■'"'*'  '"'•'^  ^'"  '"  *^««»"t« 
General  Good wyn  differs  from  this,  and  his  view  seems 
peciharly  his  own.  The  soiil  for  him  i.  '•  that  combination 
of  parts  of  the  nou^r  man,  which  is  the  seat  of  the  mind  and 
a^ections,  and,  having  the-  breath  of  lite,  gives  action  to  the 
otiter  members  of  the  body.'H  That  is,  the  soul  is  appar- 
-  ent  y  the  lungs  and  h6art  and  their  connections ' 

A  fourth  and  a  final  view  (very  near  akin  to  Goodwvn's) 
IS  commcjn  to  Messrs.  Ellis  and  Jiead,  and  the  Chds3eb 
phians  alike.     With  these  soul  and  body  are  one.     "  A  liWnl 

bony.  The  word  so.il,"  says  Roberts,  "  simply  means 

a  breathmg  creature."     "That  whi.-h  it    u.       u      •  , 

^foa  I'l      ..,  ^"»t  ^^"'^-h  It  ilescnbes  IS  spoken 

of  as  capabl.of  hunger(Prov.  xix.  15) ;  of  beingsatisfied  with 
food   Lam.  ..  ll_lf)) ;  of  touchinga  material  object  (Lev.  v 

;i;  of  ^^p"  '""^  't  ^"^"  '^"'  ^^^"'-  "--^)5  "f  -«^-g 

out  of  it  (Psa.  XXX.  .  ),  etc.  It  is  never  spoken  of  as  an  im 
material,' immortal,  thmking  entity.  .  .  It  is  not  only  repre- 
sented as  capable  o'f  death,  but  as  naturally  liable  to  it  "  etc  ** 
The  questions  as  to  the  soul  are  s,ifficiently  plain  in  these 
quotations.  ^  «.««dc 


[0.S1. 


*  Debt  anrl  Grace,  p.  2*>n.  ♦ 

t  SrripUiVe  Doctrine  of  Future  Punishment,  pp.  93   141       ' 
-r'!^K.t  !'::''"'•     :j-::^""-^^-^-^ition.     irElpisI.rae1. 


weh-c  T^echir.'v,  |,[,   .■■{•(^  ^o 


JLJIl 


:^i 


/ 


14 


iNTnonurxroN, 


fhf '  ^l^^'i^!  ^"^"'^  '***^  "^  ♦^^^  ^'^ked,  these  writers  have 
.tiie  mem  of  almost  complete  harmony.  The  wicked  ar.In 
be  "bun.t  up»,to  be-cxtinct,"  "  destLyed  utler,;'' in  h  : 
sense  of  it,  "  blotted   out   of  oxistonoH"  etc      tL       ul 

this.       Eternal  l,(e     „  eternal  rxislence.  and  tluH  alone  the 

r-!^  .r  J  ^  f     ""'"""""''"™  'n  »"="-<loinB.    The  rest 
w,th  the  dev,l  (for  those  that  believe  in  one)  wHl  finaltlf 
may  be  after  protracted  torment  in  the  lake  of  flre^pL'h 
and  come  to  an  end.     Kvil  will  be  extin-„ishe,l  ,n,I  f„T 
«g  be   over   forever;  the   whole   univeC t;^  "■ 'e  tm  ' 
■U  ™„bns,  and  the  resti.n.ion  „f  all  .hi„,s  be  Tle^ 

These  writers  dirter  a.,  to  certai.,  ,,oi„,s,  how<.ver  Son,, 
affirm  the  resurrection  of  ail  men  •  some  even  f  • 
any  of  the  wicked  :  bnt  these  mJst  levc  re.l''''f''  "'  *" 
ftom  the  number  oft  hose  j„.,t  spoken  •  Th7  f  ,  T-'* 
real  retribution  seems  'V^^Jf:::{^lJ'::Z:^ 
anmhdationists  thein.selvcs  has  come  forth  ,  1  „  i  ?  "^ 
The  followers  of  Thomas  helioTel  a '  anhl  re  ""^  '' 

from  which  infants  i,li„,s  «,„,  ,,,     ,.    F,  """""^oi'O" 

and  new  birth  for  th  m      ^n    v  nto   i  ""  ""'"''*''• 

.    Other  differences  .earce™  2;   e    !  "bT^rrtr""*-     v 

::r:^eii-:;~ 
«2^frrt™tt;:;L-"?h'"'rY^"^ "«' 

are  divided  into  twp  main  .;  '„r  ''Z^^YTr 

that  of  the  laree  Universilis.  ,1  „         "•"»"".     The  first  is 

;^th  the  Unitarian  '^::^::i^^zz2::^'t;^ 

t«re,^he.veri:w;;   ,tf,,::;;;;::;:f-;f".n  "P  «-P- 
ofthon^.ht.    Tl ,|,i,,,     ■"' ','.  •"'''■•^^.' «-,tl,  e„„re  freedom 


l'"--l""i  IS  the  qnestion  of  main 


mters  have 
3ked  are  to 
•Jy  "  in  this 
rhe    whole 
8  affirming 
'  alone  the 
those  that 
The  rest, 
finally — it 
re— perish 
ind  suffer- 
free  from 
at  length 

?!••     Some 
y  it  as  to 
^f  course 
ial  of  any 
'r  among 
gainst  it. 
irrection 
xcluded; 
•n  state, 
th  in  an 
i^iewR  of 


nd  will 
Id  them 
'■  first  is 
lentified 
With 
ural  in- 
Scrip. 
rce4lom 


iNTKOi>r(moN.v 


16 


,   mtc.ro«t.a,>,l  .,o..e^m  with  them,  a,„l  th««  w«  may  have  to 
ilo  with  them.  '  '" 

The  Beco,„l  «cho„l  is  „,ainly  a  Oerma,.  importatioH,  where 
.t  ean  boast  the  names  of  Rengel  and  Neahder,  of  Tholuok 
and  01ehi.>,«en.  Through  Maurice  and  others  it  has  gro™ 
mto  notonety  in  Engl=„,d,  and  Dr.  Farrar's  well-known  ser- 

of   Etema  IIo^,e,"  have  ,,u.  1  hem  before  the  masses  in  a  way 
to  attract  almost  universal  attention.  His  book  has  little  in  It 
thM  ,s  or,g,„aU.owover.  being  in  large  part  a  reproduction 
of  one  by  .Mr.  Co.v,  of  N  ottingham,  in  which  the  three  words 
"damnation,"  "hell"  ,.nd  "  everl.asting '•  are  challengTt 
mistrans  at,on.,  in  the  .same  w.y  as  they  are  by  Canon  Ial" 
A  th,rd  book,  ft„,n  which  Mr.  C„.v  him.,elf  ..onfessedly  .o 
muc .  ,s  ,h,.t  of  Mr    Jukes,  u.ore   broadly  heterodo/th,^ 
either,  oven  to  denying  iu  the  Swedenborgian  manner  the 
reaurroction  of  the  dead.?  ,  Atonement  is  idso  se.^1 1 
h.s  work  „n   restitution ;  «  „„save,l  „,a„  in  Gehenna  be- 
comes /.,.,  „„„  siu-offoring.^  an,l  rises  „,,  to  God,  wht  as  to' 
rnTCph-'Vr    'V""""'  ''^P™'"'  ''»'h  and  j„dg 
Messrs.  Coxandfarrar  ,lo  not  indeed  reproduce  but  the 
thought  of  .atonement  is  not  in  .heir  bo„ks,[and  t  is  fair  to 
nfer  that  it  ,s  not  in  their  minds.      Saintly  Luis  for  d7  F 
heir  samt  mess  secures;  In,,  f„r  „,„„,,•.  „      »,,,    ^'r  fn 

there  may  be  no  remedy  but  Ionian  m-e.,!  True,  it  isthete 
of  God  8  love  though  „,  Gehenn.,,  b„,  Clirist  did  not  die 
that  they  might  have  that.  ""^  uie 

.,  Com,,.  Snlra.,,,.  M„„,,i,  p„.  ,,„.,,,      J       ^     -";    __    .    - 


/ 


f  main 


-Se»."FternaIIIn,„.,-i,..86,otc. 


c 


Id 


tXTRODUCTlOK. 


(( 


These  thVcebook-,  "Etenml  ll„,,e,-  ''tiuhator 
he  liestitut on  of  All   hm  •        ,.  ^^"'vaior 

>resentative  of  .r     •         ^ '""^'«'    »»•'»/ >e   Ihirl^ 
"t-qmiative  ot  this  nsm.r  s,.k„«i      /w  ..         ,.  -^ 


repreqentat 
will  not  all< 

difficult 


18  risintr 


Mundi,"* 

"fe'«,    maybe   fairly  taken  as 

school.     Of  these  Canon  V 


or 


himself  to  be  classed  as  a  Universal 


'arrar 


may  only 


passages  stan 


I  iii^fi 


listt     T 


wo 


18  way,  although  these 


may  make  ashamed,  no  doubt-  bur  h  !"  ^'''P''  *^'^* 

'      it.     When  Scripture  is  td^^^^^^^^ 

cannot.  ^'^''''  ^'^^'''^  ^''e  few  hopes  we 

which  i,  a  sd^CThl'i:;:^!'':?''."!'*''  """«»■" 

■•epresent  a  theory  of ,  ,e  rttitirn    V  ,".  '"•<'«'»'•'•.  ""'I 

urge  G„.rs  tein/„.e  SavCoT  „"»„;" Z'T  K  '"'"^ 
men  should  be  saved     Ffr.rr,.i  J       '  '^  ^^''"  ^hat  all 

rabbine,  and  which   unifP«  tK,  '''''''''''''' ^^^^^''tam 

restoration.     TheLX "s ^Mr IJ   ^''  T''''^'^^   ^^ 
Mng  followers  among  f;.mc'?il'r 7  ''"""' ^"^  ^--- 

^•ng  reauy  met  f„  .meeting  tho  e  o  1     .V  "' '  '""'^'  ^t,  Arguments 
Farrar.  his  disciple,  botlV  b^etter  kn^v^    "  '"'"'  '"^  ™^«^«^'  -  «f  Canon 
tMr.^Giemance  also  refuses  n.eter„; 

by  ^''i^of  h"or  al^m";:^                                                »>au>  spoken 
«"■    Sec  cl.a,.ter  xxv.  of  o.is  h^fc  '^''"^  '"  ""^  ^''"  ""iverse  at 


fo 

Fi 

he 

hii 

at 

E> 

coi 


/ 


^i 


at  ses 


^W' 


»tor  Mundi,"* 
lirly  tak(;n  as 
^imon  Farrar 
Jalistt     Two 
though  these 
»ge,"  so  that 
a  hope  that 
east  indulge 
w  hopes  we 

school  have 
all  things,"  , 
)roader,  and 
t'rse.  They 
kill  that  all 
eternal,  and 
rhe  phrases 
as  "  ages," 
vever  long, 
s  and  Cox, 

3trine  of  a 
•  mercy  of 
mercy. 

se  points, 
of  certain 
ation   and 
and  he  is,, 
fiihilation- 

arguinents 
>r  of  Canon 


ath  spoken 
lui verse  at 


/I 


INTRObtJCTION.  11 

Death  ,,ot  L,  c,"  to  rq.laeo  it  by  a„„tl,<.r  c.n.itlcl  "Hope 
for  our  Kaco,',„  which  ho  advocates  Mr.  DunnV  theory 
Jrom  ,t  I  learn  that  Mr.  Dobncy  ha.s  also  given  in  hi»  ad 
.os.„„  an,l  that  Mr.  Hudson  accepted  these  views  before 
h.s  death.  Mr.  Storrs  also,  writer  „f  the  "Six  Sermons  "is 
at  present  advocating  them  in  a  paper  entitled  "  The  Bible 

..^■'  °r.?  "f  ^f*'*  (q»"«  'igl'tly)  the  pre-miUennial 
commg  of  the  Lord,  but  wrongly  connects  this  with  a 
general  resurrection ;  after  which  Christ  will  be  asain 
presented  to  the  wielded  by  the  elect  church,  and  then  re 

^tCoWl  rr'  "";  ''•"■  ""'"  "'"""°'»S  ""^"-""^  there 
IS  the  lalce  ol  hrc  and  annihilation. 

A  recent  tract,  now  being  circulated  in  the  United  States, 

modifies  this  statement  by  confining  the  number  of  those 

cvangehzed  to  those  who  had  not  heard  the  gospel  in  their 

ormer  h,e   on  earth,  and  adds  the  conjecture  (startlinriy 

sugsesfvem   v.ew  of  Mat,,   xxiv.   26)   that   Christ  may 

already  be  upon  <v,rrt  ,„„<,,  and  only  be  waiting  the  moment 

to  manifest  Himselfto  His  people.'  ,        '"""'™ 

;    IV.  ^  , 

In  conclusion  I  need  only  allude  to  Mr.  Birks'  view 
which  I  have  examined  at  some  length  in  a  separate  chap-' 
ter.  He  does  not  <!e,„j  eternal  punishment,  but  he  does 
reduce  ,t  to  the  minimum;  and  his  views  iavc  found  1 
expositor  and  popular  poet  in  the  author  of  "  Yesterl;" 
To^ay,  and  Forever,"  as  the  Restorationists  have  found 
theirs  ra  the  present  poet  laureate. 

railed"  Thev"'  ""1  *"™  ""Wf"™.  -e  the  qnestions 
raised  They  cannot  be  for  m,ny  really  met  without 
patient,  protracted  examination  of  the  whie  subjecTfrl 
the  stand-pomt  of  Scripture;  which,  if  it  be  God's 


j^^ord, 


4 


IB- 


finally  authoritative;  if  it  be  something  lesrthai'Ih'irwe  are 
at  sea  and  in  darkness,  withoi.t  rnddcr  and  withontSIpC 


ft 


V.'^"' 


V. 


18 


ixTRomrn 


.<^- 


Bc,«.<l  be  <.„,.,  .•.".„!  .hjfcWJm^,,-  conflicting  .,.^. 
menta  „„o  a«.ura„lh,  «j^]b5t||,tay  and  comfort  „f  „„ 

Zl'  ^   l.K    '"'  "■*'jii'>J'«.^.  •'"»«  know  of  the  doc- 
trine,  whether  it  be  ujUllPr'       ■  (♦ 


rv 


0' 


I  •». 


\"^'"- 


■I 


i^- 


f'lf 


}'m" 


nflicting  Htate- 
omfort  of  our 
3w  of  the  doc- 


^R, 


FACT8  llNB  THEORIE 

AS  TO  A  miTUKK  STA 


FAKT  l.-AfAX  AS  HK  IK 


i-  >,''» 


()HAl4"KR  I. 


% 


THK  niW 


V     ALL 


^     Ix  the  language  of  absolute  mfmriali.m  th6  body  is  the 
il^hole  man.    It  may  need  breather/'  spirit  "  (in  the  Thomas- 
|ite  se^se)  t^  make  it  capable^  of  ftUfilling  its  fi&tions,  but 
|m  materialistic  language,  thoifght,  reasonr mind>aie  proper- 
I ties  pertaining   to  "brain  in   human   form,"     Dr    Thomas 
|gravely  adduces  Kom.  viii.  6,  where  he  translates  r6  ^,o- 
frvua  r,s  y.   ,  the  "  thinking  of  the  flesh,"  as  an  ii^refrag- 
kble  proof  that  the  "/..A  ist/urthMinr,  srd^stanee:^  i  7 
the  brain;    whieh,  in  another  place,  he   adds,  the  apostle 
terms  the  fleshy  tablet  of  the  heart."  (!)*     I  .orily  quote 
t\u7  ^""'"^^^  h«^^  thoroughly  with  them  the  lody 

'"  ""-^    ^^  '''"""^  ^^^y  «••*>'  was  such  before  the  breath  of 

"        '  ■"        ■    r    ,/  .    ■   .  ■_  _       ■ 

/"Elpislsrael/'p.  k).  ,  "       - 

t  Roberts  objects  tiat  it  i.  ,m>i    deHned  whether  ..  livu.c  body   is 

:r;:L::j:"L::!:-i^-!^-'----^-^-the.^^^^ 


is  the  whole 


r     n       .  ,  .  1  'liaii.aiid  are  wonderin"  what  obierfinn 

»o»Hheor.v,  l,e  cannot  iv„„l  r^sarding  ,„„  ,!,.,„„  ,„„,,.„,  „,,  ^^'^^ 


N 


^1^ 


% 


^w^ 


^    ■ 


fe  ■    -^ 


i 


^ 


I 

■     ^    ■  ^^ 


%Tho 


■| 

;:$  ■  ^, 

• 

^> 

"  ii 

1, 

.1'    •. 

* 

'   . 

''±1" 

1-  ,; 

.    ,;?'  • 

:-  ■  ■..:^\^- 

iriiily  lioriiB.  S    f  " 

|Tho  A  tolMJ  It  now  tettcwl  under  liydr«u!lc  [m^wrn  to 
iftup'rttii  and  tlmt  thur©  i»  no  loaktj?©. 
*Tko  ^b^U  vmt  ii  HOW  turni'd  over  to  the  length  of  32 
in  ,  tor«|n  iniw'  (ni  tlie««  gmm  the  /iwcA  coil  in  enUed 
the  B  tuK,)  pljvloualy  made  of  two  eoll«,  und  h  giw  chan- 
nel ,»,r  •»"•  ^•»***'  '•*  *'"^  n»'»"»»^'y  """""^^  '*'"  ^  ^"''*''  conununl-^ 
eating  by  ttar  grooven  at  the  end,  with  the  gan  ew;ai)«.     If 
anythinj^  given  w»y  about  tlic  breeeh  end,  the  g^^capo* 
and  given  warning.  ,Ji'Mlk 

The  tube  i«  n.ade  double  at  this  parC,  so  that  'wflP'*^'' 
layer  give*  way  the  gan  may  eucape  without  biifiFilig  the 
giiii ;  |uul  aUo  it  enable*,  by  the  »lirinking  on  of  the  Ii 
ttibe,  griiftter  ntrength  to  be  given  to  thi«  part.     The  whole 
tube  is  tlbn  tine  turned  to  proper  diinenaii.ns,  allowing  a 
little  play  Iwiween  it  and  the  cusing,  bo  that  it  can  be  easily 
forced  in.     Great  car©  in  taken  that  the  bretsch  end  of  tube 
bears  fairly  against  the  bottom  of  the  bore.    The  curvof  part 
of  the  end  of  the  barrel  is  made  with  a  longer  radiun  than 
the  oorresponding  curve  in  the  cast  iron,  the  space  between 
preventing  a  wedge  like  action,  tending  to  split  the  casing. 
When  the  tube  is  adjuHted,  the  collar  is  screwed  in  at  tlnj 
muzzle,  and  the  hole  bored  under  the  trunnion*;  and  a 
wrought  iron  pin  screwed  in.    The  bore  is  thou  rifled,  with 

three  small  gl^|ove8. 

*   The  old  vent  is  closed  by  a  wrought  iron  ^crew  plug, 

and  the  now  vent  drilled  a  little  IVoiu.  the  breech  end.     A 


BtalM. 


f 


%■ 


Veat. 


Jdit - 1- 


I: 


!■ 


it 


r  "» 


^ 


ao 


u 


FACTS  AND  THFOIIIES  AS  TO  A  FVTUUE  STATE 


life  was  breathed   into  him.    ^'D 


list   thou  art"    expresses 


^ 


^ 


f:i' 


what   ,c  i»  i,,  hi,  wh„h,  b..i.,g.    Say«  Mr.  Cons„.l,U.  «  God 
formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground.    Here  hV  me  the 

HiLTf     U^"  '^""'t'^l'"^"  thi',  for  God   tolLs   uf  o 

"^^^iireneriv  "^h  '''    .'?°"*-'"""'  "'"'  ^  '''"''  "^  V'tal- 

,    fe    energy,      ihe    «/r</i   hunse/t'  is    tli,.    l,r..l,r     *i        i 

.bat  Ilea  in  the  grave.     Spirit  id   »':,  ''2^^    .'in  i^ 
Jsa.ssoc.ated  from  man;  man  may  rei„„,  to  hf,  Y^    "M 

.tr^  r  "^k'"'  """"  "  ""•  -"  '•"'  "-^  •  °  ^  th  J  haTe 
Mr.  Blam's  emphatic  challenge,  « where  does  the  Imok  of 

Confidence   so  assured  ought  to  l,o  well  foun.led      Tl 
answer  .s  ea.,y,  ,h.u  ,hey  are   „„|y  .p.o.in.f  ^    "  j,,/  '^ 

^^ErrrM;^-rr-J:' 

-  __  _,_-_^'_^t^tme  and  proper  man.     This  opinion  we 

soul.  ••'         •'        ^""  'i^f  the  spirit  nt.r  tlio 

*  Hades,  d  •>         +  tk    ».   c  ,  ^ 

•>•-         tlb.,p.5.  tPeathnot  L!lv..l:iM.H..p.4-> 


1 


STATE. 

irt "    expresses 
msfiiblo,  "  Got! 
•e  wc  liave  tlie 
yet  this  figure 
tl   tolls   us  so 
«k,  or  feel,   or 
i  nit  ion  of  the 
Constable,  as 
.  Thomas  and 
he   breathing 
ler  the  breath 
dnd  of  vital- 
ly—the   dust 
fly   again  ^IkJ^ 
liis    old    cori- 
ily  they  have 
"Wfiere,"is 
tlie  book  of 
11  is  made  of, 
declaration, 

mded.     The 
one  side   of 

inconsistent 
thus  repre- 
ristendom.'' 
Hot  inhabit 
'0<ly  or  not 
opinion  we 

iPoiy  tpachcs 

le  house  are 
n  statement, 
'  R.  may  put 
>int  ii(»r  the 


&  THE   BODY  ALL? 


''^'9: 


believe  to  be   the  very   foundation   stone   of  -m    nm«,-  ' 

^     amount  of  false  doctrine.     This  talse  phiL:^h;;c:Xl  ^ 
.     human  nature  has  tainted  the  theology  of  centlri!i.I-"%. 

JVow,  how  IS  It  possible  that  Mr.  Constable   h.« 
:    ^en  that  this  "current  opinion  of  Chr^;::^/^^^^ 

'  ^    r    'v^      '  '  ^''  ^"  '*'^  ""«  «'<'«  F»««a.res  such  a! 

,    those  he  quotes,  which  seem  to  make  the  l,o,lv  Jl  th  1 
I    many  oh  the  other  side  that  would  on,.  I  '  '"'^ 

I  I'l^^x^?''^'''''^  '^iniive.':!^^::^"  ™ 

I    !^,^'"'"rf- to  1- absent  from  theb4"  (v^'sv 

q?.\^T '         '^    7v  yourselves  also  in  the  bo.ly  "  (Heb   vi  i  -    ' 
13)^  '^n  my  flesh  shall  I  see  God  "  (Job  xiv   ^y)     'k 

ingthat  I  m..^p,^off  ,,j,  ^^  tabiaclcf '^op^i  i    ur"     ■ 
I         Now  I  ask  Mr.  Constable  U  nnt  ^.  ^^  ^  *-^-  '•  '*)• 

f    he  object,  .„,  ,he  foujS,'.   t™   t^tZ  T^  I'T^^ 
^    of  error  but  of  truth  V 'I  acJ„T^-,l^..       .i  ^'"P<«<"^)  not 
sious  are  indeed  the  Ji:::^':^Z^:^  ^  "''!"''■  i'' 
On  the  materialistic  ™PPo.iti,„  tl.e'^L:    „:  „     .TT"''    *'*» 
passages  never  could  have  arL„     It  fs  nX,  !  "'° 

tl.e  interpretation  of  any  s,,ecia  tcv  lT„f  ?,""'*'""  "^ 
words  which  contradict  at  the  outset  he  'l"e  „  T  "'r  °' 
phdosophy.  Men  have  sought  to  evade  ,t  "f  ""''«"= 
the  phrase  "in  the  body  "  l.  mean  "  M  JbUyf.rv^ 
were  m  contrast  with  the  glorious  bodvnfl^'  ''^  " 
But  the  fact  that  they  have  to  clu.^i'  1^  resurrection, 
order  to  make  it  suit  them  is\  T^^  • ,  e'^preseion,  in 
not  suit  them  as  it  is  Fo'r  „  ,t  '  '"'*'""'"  **""  "  ''»<'= 
still  be  "in  the  body"  ,hLl    ^\"'''"'^<=tion  man  will    . 

will ;  and  in  po  n   otfkct    t  1'  o'  h       '■""'  «'""'""'  "^  >'         

in  the  passage'jnst  qutVj  h  ret^  •"T:""^  T'  *""' 
see  God."    Thev  mav  nprho  '     ^  o^J  Afish  shall  I 

, hey  may  perhaps  quote  againsuhis,  that  <^  flesh       ' 


*  ir-'.le.s,  ,,.  4. 


■^■'^t^- 


22 


FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


and  blood  cannot  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God  ; "  but  it  will 
not  avail  them ;  for  the  Lord's  own  expression  as  to  His 
own  body  in  resurrection  is,  that  He  had  "flesh  and  hones  »* 
though  not  "  flesh  and  blood;'  and  it  is  the  combination  of 
the  two  of  which  the  text  cited  speaks.f     And  the  Lord 
was  raised  from  the  dead,  the  "first  fruits"  and  pattern  of 
our  resurrection  from  the  bej^i^ning,  not  raised  and  changed 
afterwards,  even  as  they   t^^eep  in   Him  2.x^- raised^ 
m  glory."    There  is  no  es^v%>'m  the  plain  sp'eaking  of  the 
passage  in  Job,  that  to  thaf^hich  is  i<  raised  in  glory  "  he 
refers.     And  this  alone  is  positive  proof  that  "  in  the  flesh  '* 
or  "  in  the  body  "  does  not,  as  a  phrase,  speak  of  a  present 
corruptible  body  in  contrast  with  an  incorruptible  one. 

And  there  are  other  texts  which  would  still  stand  in  the 
way  of  their  establishment  of  this  position,  if  the  passage  in 
Job  were  gone.     For  when  the  apostle  says  of  his  vision  qf 
the  third  heaven,  that  he  could  not  tell  whether  he  was  "  in 
the  body  or  out  of  the  body,"  no   words  are  needed   to 
assure  us  that  here  there  was  no  question  of  the  resurrec- 
tion body.     For  it  was  not  ^cheti  he  was  up  in  the  third 
heaven,  that  he  did  not  know  if  he  were  "out  of  the  body;  '* 
had  it  been  so,  there  might  have  been  some  kind  of  doubt 
aA  to  whether  he  might  not  have  fancied,  in  the  entrance- 
ment  (5f  the  vision,  that  the  resurrection  had  already  come. 
But  his  words  are  precise  and  prohibit  absolutely  such  a 
supposition.     He  could  not,  at  thf^  fhnc  he  tn-ote,  question 
whether  he  had  been  clothed  with  the  resurrection  body, 
and  agam  lost  it  on  his  return  to  earth.     Yet  here  "  in  the' 
body  "  and  «  out  of  the  bo<ly  "are  just  a^  much  in  contrast 
as  "at  home  m  the  body  "  and  "  al>sent  from  the  body  "in 
2  Cor.  V.  6-8.     And  as  «  out   of  the  body  *'  cannot  in  this 
case  mean  "in  the   resurrection  state,' so   "in  the   body" 
o^not  mean,  as  they  would    make'  it,  "  in  this  corruptible 
8tate."§  *^, 

*  Luko  xxiv.  397"  tl~CoT  XV.  60.     X  1  Cor.  rv.  4.3. 
$  T<,  all  tl.is  Mr.  Roberts  do,n„rs  upon  tl,e  warrant,  as  he  represent. 
U,  of  Ro,...  v„.   I     o   Cor.    i.    ^.   and  a  list  of  j^aH.ages  ot  Iho  das. 


I 


I 
If 


I 


ATE. 

but  it  will 
as  to  His 
ad  bones,''** 
Moation  of 
the  Lord 
jjattein  of 
d  changed 
3  *' raised  I 
cing  of  the 
glory  "  he 
the  flesh'* 
a  present 
one. 

nd  in  the 
massage  in 
vision  Qf 
^  was  "  in 
eeded   to 
resurrec- 
the  third 
e  body ;  '* 
of  doubt 
entrance- 
Lly  come. 
y  such  a 
question 
on  body, 
5  "in  the 
contrast 
»ody  "  in 
t  in  this 
I   body" 
ruptible 


epresents 
ihn  class 


IS  .THE   BODY   ALL? 


23 


Roberts  suggests  that  "  without  the  body "  means  that 
't  the  things  were  seen  as  in  a  dream."      But  how  is  even' a 


already  adduced  by  Messrs.  Constable  and  Blain.  He  takes  "  my  flesh  " 
in  the  first  passage  to  mean "  my  body,"  and  argues  thereupon  that 
Paul  calls  his  "flesh"  Amse^/;  and  moreover  attributes  sin  to  it  and 
not  to  his  soul !  He  does  not  see  that  in  ver.  25  the  apostle  op-Iosess 
the  "mind  "to  the  "flesh,"  and  identifies  himself  with  the  former  in 
opposition  to  the  latter.  If,  as  with  Mr.  Roberts,  tlie  "  mind  "  is  only 
the  working  of  the  flesh,  n6  such  distinction  is  possible.  The  apostle's 
words  are  thus  conclusively  against  him.  " 

Hopeless  indeed  would  be  man's  condition  if  the  flesh  and  the  body 
were  but  one,  uu]  '  thoy  that  are  in  the  body  could  not  please^  God  " 
(see  Rom.  viil.  b;,  and  strange  enough  what  the  apostle  affirns  of 
Christians,  that  they  are  "  not  in  the  flesh."  The  whole  use  of  the 
language  here  is  foreign  to  materialistic  speech.  As  to  the  Scripture 
doctrine  of  the  flesh  w^  shall  have  to;  speak  of  it  l^gfeafter. 

As  to  2  Cor.  i,  8,  we  may  easily  admit  tli;at  Paul  ideuUfles  himseli' 
with  the  body  there,  without  in  the  least  invalidating  the  testimony  of 
the  texts  which  use  an  opposite  style.  Nor  does  Paul  "  look  here  to 
resurrection  for  hope,"  but  to  the  God  of  r^urrection,  and  gets  present 
deliverance.  On  the  other  hand,  the  belief  in  the  immortality  of  the 
soul  does  not  in  the  least  set  aside  the  hope  of  resurrection.  As  we 
may  by  and  by  see,  it  secures  it. 

As  to  Mr.  R.'s  list  of  texts,  no  Christian  has  any  difficulty  with  them" 
at  all.  But  think  of  quoting  "my  decease"  (2  Pet.  i.  15)  literally  ' 
•'n,y  exodus"  or  "dcpaHiire,"  to  support  a  materialistic  purpose' 
Ihmk  of  supposing"/ was  unknown  hy  facer  or  "  whatever  a  man 
soweth,  that  shall  he  reap,"  or  "avenged  the  blood  of  His  servants  " 
with  all  the  emphasis  that  italics  and  small  capitals  can  .rive  will  con- 
vict immortal  soulists  by  their  bare  citation  ! 

He  then  comesHo  the  passages  which  he  has  to  meet.  In  Gal  ii  20 
he  takes  the  apostle  as  expressing  present  existence  in  contrast  with' 
the  '  life  that  is  to  come."  But  that  is  not  the  question.  Why  such 
an  expression. as  "in  the  flesh"  at  all,  if  he  were  non^ht  but  fleshj 
"  Absence  from  the  body,"  again,  cannot  be  resurrection  by  any  possi-  • 
bihty  whatever.  So  as  to  .Job,  how  else  could  Job  see  God.  in  Mr  R  's 
way  of  thinking,  except  indeed,  as  he  says  in  another  case,  he  drramed 
of  Him'?     And  that  will  scarce  do  here. 

How  decisive  these  passages  really  are  against  him  Mr.  R.  shows  by 
styling  them  "  the  Inevitable  '  fictions  '  of  mortal  speech."  But  why 
inevitaMe?  Could  not  matoriattsm  indeed  dispense  with  thei,»  ?  And 
why  "  fictions,"  if  after  all  they  convey  his  meanin<T  9 


dr\ 


FACTS  Ax\J>  THEOlllES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATfi. 


(am 


'  without  thii  body 


as  ho  i)]iraseH  if:'    The  apostle 


anyVloubt  of  l)elH^r  actually  eaiuj;] 


that 


<t  away  to  Paradise,  a  place 


\tor  Mr.  lioW^ts  has  no  present  existence;  it  is  the 
renewed  earth,  infhis  belief.     Did  3Ir.  Roberts  Uer  (wth 

whetherW-  not  he  had  been  carried  bodily  to  a  place  which 

He  kaew  liail  no  existence  V 

The  te,Ws  Ihen  abi.l,.  i„  „11  their  eimplicity,  full  of  the 
meann,g  ,vWh  f,„„.  their  si„.p,ieity  the,  pLess.     Nay 
11   the  comnWnts  „f  Annihilationists  were  just  their  force 
won  a  be  littlVaffc.ete.1.    For,  be  it  in  eontra'st  wi^h  a  rfsur 

not)Bm  the  ,uX,  /^  i,  ,„„t,a  at  as  "  ..v  the  body:  " 
not  the  so.,1  .»  nU  o,  ,„e  spirit  i,  in  it  merely,  but  the 
MA^.    That  wluch\l,es  in  the  bcly  (and  that  is  the  force 

'^^r.het[n"..p:3V"  "■"  •'"''^■"■-'""  «  1'-'-  '^)- 

the  body  ,s.     15„  ,t  spiritVr  s„„l,  „r   both  together   the 
phraseology  of  Seripturc  in  ,Lse  texts  assc,-.s  thit  the  Cdy 
ns  such  a„  mhabitant.      AndXthis  language  it  is  that  Mr"^ 
C„    table  accuses  (under  an„,h\na,„e,  no'doubt,  as  bring' 

the  very  foundation  stone  "  of  the  doctrino  hL 
S«.p,urc  then,  be  is  witness  to  ^^U^Lilul^a^^Z"^. 
dat,„„  o   the  mnnortality  of  the  soul.     ].,.„[  sees  visions  Zd 
has  so   bttl.  thought  that  ,l,c  body  is  all,  tj.at  C'Z, 

*  The  Word  ii;,,.,!  i~,  si'tUimr^    ••  .      i  .         .      \  ' 

«w-ii..v  („,...  i,  e„i,  acc„.ai,'  ™  ,„ .]  a tiJirrrr'r"*-  ■■ 

Imniiliatio,,  :  l,„i  ,1,0  <I,-slinv  „r  ,1 .,       •  ,  •  ''"''''  "' ""' 

and  W„o.l  „atufo  into  .snirit  nmZ','  ^'"'*''  "  '^'■°'"  "^'"^ 

■lotLecl  with  an  ■■  c3       ",     Vr     '  ""  '  T  '"    '  """  """  ""■ '" 

ana  „e  „.,„  .,„.a,  „:^.  Lr'L!^-,;;;-;;;,:^:'"^ '° """- 


Wf 


STATfi. 

The  apostle 
Nor  has  he 
adise,  a  place 
3e;  it  is  the 
ts  ever  (with 
dream  with- 
t  ever  after/ 
place  which 

full  of  the 
isess.     Nay, 

their  force 
^ith  a  resur- 
places  it  is 
the  body;" 
ly,  but  the 
s  the  force 
>0  much  so 

Pet.  i.  14), 

labit&nt  of 
rether,  the 
t  the  body 

that  Mr. 
)  as  being 
3  opposes. 

the  foun- 
isions,  and 
'i  he  does 

e  "  (Liddell 
es  our  intli- 
)odyofour 
corruptible 

from  flesli^ 
Lhat  we  are 

to  clothe. 


IS   TUE    BODY    ALL? 


25 


not  know  whether  he  was  in  it  or  not,  at  the  time  he  saw 
them.  Plainly,  therefore,  he  supposes  he  might  be  a  con- 
scious, mtelh^ent  witness  of  unutterable  things  while  «  out 
01  the  body." 

^    We  are  prepared,  then,  to  answer  Mr.  Blain's  confident 
mqmry  ,f  at  least  we  may  take  for  granted  that  that  which 
Paul  thought  might  be  -out  of  the  body"  is  not  -dust." 
U  It  be,  It  IS  at  any  rate  dust  which  is  not  the  body,  and 
which  can  exist  consciously  in  separation  from  it.  ^ 
^  The  question  is  thus  a  long  way  toward  settlement.     If  it 
be  stil    asked,  \Yhat  about  the  texts  which,  on  their  side 
Anmhilationists  lay  stress  upon?    Is  not  "  dust  thou  art"' 
Scriptuire?    And  is  it  not  equally  written  that  "the  Lord 
Crod  formed  man  of  the  dust  of  the  ground  "  ?  and  that 
I  ^devout  men  carried  Stephen^ ^ ^r^o^.  his  body  merely-^-to 
I  nis  burial"  ?  ^  ■ 

.den  .fied  w.th  h,s  body,  »3  ho  is  in  the  former  ones  wi'th  his 

?JI  ^iTh  ,  ,  '' '™"'''  "^  "■'■""S  to  argne  exclusively 
frome,therelass  ol  passages:  «,  wrong  to  say  man  isallsou^ 
upon  the  authonty  of  one,  as  to  say  he  is  all  body,  upon  th^ 
anthonty  of  the  other.  This  last  is  the  vitiating  error  of 
Mr.  Constable's  whole  argument.    Neither  body%or  souP 

bodv"'a  Th        T.;"'r''">' ''"'  "^P'*  -'0  ™»'  and  . 
body     (1  Thess  V.  2.3)  make  up  the  „,an ;  insomueh  that  he     ' 

may  be,  and  ..,,  ulentified  with  either,  according  to  the  line 
of  thought  wh,ch  is  in  the  mind  of  the  speaker    his  iden  fi 
cafon  , nth  the  body,  which  man  sees  and  touches  bt„t 
general  the  language  o(  sense,  while  faith  identifies  him  with 
th^umeen  "  spirU.'-  _Dur  poor  Annihilationists  see  Ind 

lief  or  pro™:....  a„a  >,a»  to  ao":;,!;  „  ■    '  TZ^:^'!,  "Z^^        ^ 


\' 


■M 


FACTS  ANI>  TUKOE1E8  AS  TO  A  F./TURE  STATK. 


■    conCeH,  ^hat  »en8e  recosnize,,  and  are  blind  to  the  other 
It  18  a  sad  evidence  of  their  condition. 

Of  the  Lord  Jcsua  HimHelf,  I  read  in  the  account  of  Hi« 
bunal,  "  .here  laid  they  Jen.,'.  „,„,  ,u.i  Joseph  Took  Jt 
.lown  and^rapped  y/,„,  in  the  linen,  and  laid  H  m  in  the 
sepulchre"  (John  xij.  42;  Mark  xv  4r,>      T.  .1  •    .f     ,. 
conclusive  that  the  Lord  ,va.„li,*dt  "  'V  ™'      '"'^';''' 
ahput  Stephen  .o„ld  see™  totw^n^    ZlT^l 
.     Take  so„,e  ot  Mr.  Constable's  emphatic  statement    wTkh 
he  does  not  hesitate  to  apply,  to  the  Lord  mm^Tif..f 
.ends  that  the  con,mon  opinion  leads  to   "r«tv°rf-' 
supposmg^hat  death  has  converted  „,.^rson  ^^^ 
hfe  tiere  was  but  one  Abraham,  i„  death  there  are  two^'         - 
Inhfe  her^ya,  but  one  ChrUt ;  during t,^ thrc,  d.Sof  ilL 

«visebusVy.oceu;:,rthfcKr™^^^^ 
one  for  him  he  does  not  leave  doulifu      ThT"     " 
8ists  in  calling  the  body  Vhen  deadTl  .     "*  P"" 

AbrahamandVobandD:  d  "     W  .Vthe     '  "'' ^J"^' 
aever  says  that  they  are  in  heave.i  or  !,  K'-^^.^nd  it 

'/-^.a,...»    Ofnece'^ssi.y.therth     :,.    rr    ",*"'  "' 
If  spirit  is  but  the  impe^'onm  b^:  "    •   f   jd^rult:^;"  ^ 
l.fe  resultant,  then,  wBen   ,he.,e  Kvl   depir  1,1    ,h 
"othing  of   Christ   but   what   was   L^  ^!   ..  '  "  ""^ 

may  be  said,  of  course   that  th!  w     t  ,    **  ^''''™-     '' 

humanity  of  the  Lo^l,  ^1  ttT  Hi?":  L:.^^^ 
ar^umen^W  Mr.   Consuble   will   „„t  hold     "xhe  ^l 

tifh"Mr°l:r  s^iff !; '"  ■"";  "■"  ^^^^^^^^^^  m;^, 

Th™  he  thinks  thai  "  faith  o„,„el!  bv  ?  h  T'"  «"i»factorily. 

>t  c<w»€«  at  all.     Mr  R  sur^Iv  ».,..♦    n        /  "^  question  of  how 

View  of  it  at  leas  )i7a  tit  T„?e!""'  'I'l  ■":  ''^™^"  ^P^"'  (^  -•        ' 
thing,  un»^n.»    TMs  i!  1 1..  ".und  .  •'  T  JT  "  ''^  "  ^^'^^^  o^' 
^   *  Hades,  p.  i:  '  ^^"  statement  he  objects  to. 


!  STATE. 

ft 

to  the  other. 

ccount  of  His 
)h  "  took  mm 
d  Him  in  the 
his,  therefore, 
similar  words 
that  /i(3  was  ? 
>ment8,  which 
self.    He  con- 

absurditji  of 
into  two.    In 
ire  two  I  .  .  , 
■days  of  His 
seph's  tomb  ; 
5n,  or  other- 
^s  is  the  true 
''  Bible  per- 
It  says  that 
?rave,  and  it 
'  else  but  in 
conclusion  : 
?oul  but  the 
there   was 
grave.     It 
^nly  to  the 
^ity.     This 
The  Lord, 

As  the  spirit 
'fc  I>r<>|)08e  to 
satisfactorily, 
iring  "  helps 
stion  of  how 
spirit  (in  our 

evidence  of 
y'ects  to. 


IS  THK  HODY  ALL?, 


27 


dmne  and  human,  was  in  life  but  one  person.  Ueatk  could 
not  divide  the  one  Person  into  two!  The  Persoj!^  Mr 
Constable  says,  is  the  body  that  lay  in  the  tomb  :  Deity" 
soul  and  spirit  go  for  nothing.  The  Lord  was  in  the  grave 
and  nowhere  else  !  Dare  Mr.  Constable  abide  by  his  own 
conclusions? 

All  have  not  formulated  the  doctrine  as  completely      His 

logical  consistency  has  carried   him  where,  we  may  hone 

many  will  hesitate  to  follow.     But  as   to  the  consistency' 

here  can  be  no  question.     Just  as  simply  and  as  surely  as 

<  David  ''or    Stephen  "  is  said  to  denote  the  whole  perL- 

ahty  of  David   or  of  Stephen,  so  (after  the  same  mode  of 

interpretation)  must  "  Christ "  and  "  the  Lord  "  denote  the 

true  ^nd  personal  Christ  who  survived  death,  or  not  '^      If 

so     the  Lord,"  in  the  whole  force  of  that  expression,  d  d 

.e^Wm  Joseph's  tomb;  the  words  are  only  a/examp  e  of 

whicrr^'  "'  sense  whicli  applies  to  the  material  part 

wh^  we  see  and  touch,  and  we  are  manifestly  precluded 

Wparrying  them  further.     Now,  if  the  Lord  fay  in  the 

^ra^e,  and  yet  the  higher  part  did  not  lie  there  so  Cnlam  vt 

might  David,  or  Stephen,  or  Moses,  lie  in  the X^'t 

have  another  and  higher  part  of  them  .vhict  did  not 'lie 

Thoinasism,  with  its  fearless  selfcon^stency  in  error  and 
shameless   denial  of   the    .rjorv  of   tt-     i>  ;      ' 

shrink  from  the  ext  erne  ret7  the  O   "^T^'^r   "'^^ 

earth,  could  yet  say  ' 'ThTs        f  Z"^''^'  ''^'^'^^"^  «» 

,      uiu  yei  say,     ihe  Son  of  man  who  is  in  heaven" 

they  are  strangers  to.     But  I  would  ask  even  them Ttlieir   ^ 
horrible  thoughts  were  true,  how  He  who  hT^'  ^ 

I^^w.  His  life,"  had  (af>Jr  havi^  it^lr^;!:  ' 
to  take  it  a^-ain  "     Tf  f^u  .i^.,  ^  ,  .  '      power 

tal^ejtsjife  WU    ( John   .%t' 'h';  tXT^^ 


-  ^J 


28  FACTS  AXD  THKORIli 


r 

'  Destroy  thiM  tem])lL\ 


S  AS  TO  A  PVTUItE  STATE 


and  in  thretj  days  /will 


raise  it  up  •■ 

possible  eve,  t<,  e,,,„voeute.     Fofit  w,.s  „„«  who  spake  of 

H.S  own  body,  who  sahl  //„  „•„„,,,  ,.,,,„  ,^  ^^^^^ 

not  say  .t  was  the  Fa,.,e.-„peaki„g  „f  "  „,«  o^a  body^'  Td 

herelore  the.r  cuu.,.a„t  ,„a„a,uv,.e  fails  the,u  here.    ifsZt 

1.™,  raised  up  ilis  o«„  body,  .here  must  have  been  One  „„[ 

: ":  "d!::;""'"  °"'T""'  o-^-'v-s  -leath,  zz 

"died"  t"  '"'.V'l'  *";"'  """'"'"'»"•  '■'"•  J"'-'  t^'y 

died.       rhat     the  Lonl  lay  '  i„  Joseph's  tomb  is  truth 
b„    not  the  whole  truth.     Insisted  „n  I  such,  it  becomes' 
fatal  and  soul-destrovln.r  error  "ecomes 

nos!) 'ts'he'fou!  T^"'  '"""  <'"  '''■  «°-'»'^''  "  «it. 
ness),  lajs^the  foundation  stone  of  the  soul's  immortality  in 

.ts  assertion  that  the  man  dwells  in  (i„.  bo,Iv  ..SZT-  . 
denied  by  its  speakin,  elsewhere  a.  if  t^eV:,;  w  r"  tt 
jnan.      Jrom  Us  own  point  of  view,  each  of  0^1^:^^ 


.Ax 


•"'»■ "  i'-  .p.i.- SM,„,..„..J,,„,, '  „  ;,,^:;"",.''"'  ">•  "'"•■''• 

perform  ul.alovv,-  ll,„„  was  ■,,„l„„n'    7         v  <"'"l"-fiicy  l„ 

mere  oorp,,.  „.i,|,  ..  a„,|,„  ,      "■  ,  ■•;       * ""  '■'""''  ""'  ''I"""'  " 

'•'»^'    .  aim  Hut    'receive, 
•'oliii  ii    ]\i~-2-2. 


■J! 


*■'*!, 


/ 


T».-  ■ 


y  8TATK. 

11  raise  it  up  ? 
»  it  is  scarcely 
w^ho  spake  of 
•      They  can- 

u  body,"  and 
Jre.  If  Jesus, 
been  One  not 
leatli,  to  raise 

Jesus  truly 
>mb  is  truth, 
h  it  becomes 

staWe  is  wit- 
imortality  in 
id  this  is  not 
ilywere  the 
38e  things  is 


MAK  A  TElimE  BEINO. 


2d 


ites  "receive" 

It  adds  to  tlic 
tt.  X.  1  ;  Mark 
V.  10,  Pfc.  it, 
oiiij)el»Micy  to 
not  clothe  a 
n<l,  therefore, 


CHAPTKU  ir. 

MAN  A  TRIUNE  Hlirxd, 


!  t 


of  , nan  wh.el,  d>v-eils  ,n  the  body  ?    Or.  What  is  the  phyei- 
cal  constitution  of  man  as  .leflned  by  the  Scriptures  ?  ' 

The  ansvver  from  1  Thoss.  v.  23,  is,  that  he  is  "spirit  and 

whol  y;   and  I  pray  Obd  that  your  whole  spirit,  aj L, 

Una  bo,!!,  l,e  preserved  blameless  unto  the  com  ng  of  our 

^«^;^!:-^™V  ,  '""  "''""  ''•  ""'■'»-tly,fi,rthe  Zl 

*ere,  ,t  is,  that  man  is  divided  into   his  three  consti  u^nt 

,J»rts,  and  the  sanctification  of  the  whole  man  is  imerp  "ted 

that  the  body  IS  the  whole  i,«,n;  but  it  is  also  denied  bv    ' 
many  othei.  who  are  ftr  enjugh  from  holding  the  r  vtwf 
It  IS  a  point,  therefore, -which  must  be  seriouslv  weighed  a^d    • 
.s  satisfactorily  .^,  possible  decided,  before  we  are  e„ti'tled 
to  take  It  as  a  settled  thin..  «-  .'re  entitled 

it     "Th-  ""  ^^'^y  ""'^  themselves  convinced  bv  . 

It.      'This  cannot  mean,"  thevsiv  «  tKof  «,--  i,        "^'"^^^  ^^  '  ^ 
•erh"'^^  ,-f  Tr,„  ^"^ysay,     that  mJTn  has  ^oa  v/ios^i-      * 

^:^  r~d  Zrfrt""'  r'  "^^  »^  p'-. 
-ea-....on.r,,,:r,:Lr::::;c:s; 

-     *  Bible  C.V.  TradJtioh,  p.  oj  "  — 


'li. 


30 


PACTS  AND  THKORIKS  AS. TO  A  FUTURE  STAT K. 


:i 


41  i 


■,,..'  V 


translated  "  .spirio"us  "  disposition  "  already,  that  according 
to  their  intorpfetatiou,  Imx^  ought  to  mean  ''  person,"  and 
also,  that  it  Ajrould  be  in  far  better  accordance  with  their 
views.  But  they  can  sq^rcely  expect  others  to  be  satisfied 
with  what  evidently  faille  satisfy  themselves,  for  tliey  add, 
in  defiance  of  all  critic^ :  ".And  1  Thess.  v.  2:{  muij  also 
have  been  a  little  amen(h(Jbi/  name  officious  copyist "  !  (1).  21). 
But  even  so,  they  are  not  -yet  satisfied,  and,  having  in  the 
meanwhile  forgotten  that  '•  spirit  "  means  person,  tliey  fur- 
ther add:  "  And  the  spinifual  nature,  Xm  it  remembered, 
doesjiot  ijatupally  belong  to  man,l)ut  is  fupcrin<luce*l  as  a 
subsequent  _!f^v  peculiar  dt-velopment  in  the  cases  of  those 
who  liave  sulSnitted  themselves  ti)  Christ  "  (p.  22). 

Mr.  Koberts,  disavowing  '-  the  uLertain  an  1  contradictory 
statements"  of  Ellis  and  liea.l,  trik  to  i)araphrase  the  three 
words  in  the  text  b^jO^^d^V'  *'  litb  "  and  "  mind."     In  this 
statement  of  his,  '•  life  "  aij.l  'auind"  answer,  respectively,  to 
soul  and  spirit.      J3ut  that  they  anlnot  equivalents,  accord- 
ing to  his  view,  is  evident.     W^  hUo  but  to.,  latelv  been 
listening  to  his  theories  of  thinking  fleAh,to  b(^  abb;  to  accept 
his  identification  of  tiie  mind  with  th^  spirit.    Truly,  as  these 
may  be  identified,  his  views  do  not  identify  them.  '  His  own 
words  in  this  connect ioji  are;  "  Thoiight  is  a  power  devel- 
oped   by  hraln   orfjanhatio,,,  and  consists  of  impressions 
made  uj)on  that  delicate  organ  through  the  medium  of  the 
senses,  and  afterwards  classlfio-l  and  arrangeil  by  a  function 
pertaining  in  dirterent  degrees  to  brain   in  hn,na\i  form, 
known  as  rmsohy     Plainly,  tlien,  with  him  mind  ij  only  a 
power  inherent  in  the  Hesh,  thougli  spirit  be  needed  to  give 
vitality  to  the  brain,  just  as' It  wouM  be  for  the  muscles.''  It 
is  "the  flesh  that" thinks,"  as  he  quotes  with  approbation 
further  on. 

So,  also,  is  "  life  "  with  him  not  the  equivalent  of  "  soul." 
Of  course  he  often  has  to  interpret  itjso,  but  he  is  inconsis- 
tent with  himself  in  doing  this.  '  siul,"  again,  is  for  Dr. 
Thomas  and  himself  but  "body";  anil  the  Wy  cannot  be 


m   I 
Tho 
The 
ofli; 
be  S( 
Tl 
as  c 
anxi< 
appe 
the  ] 
becoi 
Third 
elem< 
then, 
blam( 
.   ducec 
5  apost 
I      Wi 
I   Morri 
here  c 
"'Thj 
soul  a 
new  a 
i?  borr 
body.' 
Ishi 
siderat 
that  it 
f  sense," 
i  nature 


;  aggeratci 
i  Whal 


ATK. 

t  according 
erson,"  and 
with  their 
be  satisfied 
r  tliey  add, 
i  tnai/  also 
r/(p.21). 
aug  ill  the 
'^,  they  fur- 
tnumbered, 
iiice*!  as  a 
;s  of  those 

tradictory 
l;  the  three 
."     In  this 
jctively,  to 
its,  accord- 
ate  ly  been 
;;  to  accept 
ly,  as  these 
His  own 
iver  devel- 
npressions 
uni  of  the 
a  function 
<i<t\i  /onn, 
I  i|i  only  a 
e<l  to  give 
iiscles.    It 
►probation 

)f  "  soul." 
1  inconsis- 
Is  for  Dr. 
cannot  be 


MAN    A    TKIUXK    BKINti. 


81 


'>'a 


ma  secondary  sense,  is  used  for  it  in  Scripture.  In  Dr 
Thomas  theo^r  no  basis  is  left  fen-  the  secondary  rneaninn 
The  life  IS  with  him  simply  the  result  of  the  ruad  or  bre^h 
of  hfe  upon  the  body.  It  is  not  a  thinl  constituent  that  could 
be  set  side  ])y  side  with  the  body  an<l  the  spirit 

There  is  then  no  «  combincUion  of  body,  soul  an<l   spirit 
as  constituting  ,the  whole  man"  in    Mr.  lioberts'  svs  em 
anxious  as  he  is  to  be  apostolic  in  doctrine,  an<l  have  iJ 
appear  so.     Combination  of  body  an<l  spirit  for  him  mak. 
the  living  soul,  and  the  oombination  of  tlu-se   two  cam.ot 
.    become  a  third  principle   along   Nvith  these.     There  is   no 
I    third^onstifeuent  this  way,  and  even  one  of  these  is  onl v  «  an 
dement  of  the  atmosphere.-     These  are  the  three  things 
I    then,  that  the  apostle  prays  may  be  sanctified  or  preserved' 
blameless,  the  body,  the  breath  of  life,  and  the  vitality  pro 
duced  by  it  It     It  is  plain  then  that  Thomasism  iLdThe 
s  apostolic  statement  do  not  agree. 

'■  M^'."'-""'  ''"'"'«»'«»'^''<l'""«l  fr"m*llisan,l  Head  Mr 
;  Morns  „  „,  near  ..greement.     He  alio  interprets  ■•  spirit  '■ 

'  ]!Y1      "  """  """^  "P"""""  ""f"-'^-     Of  John  iii.  8  he  savs 

'That  which  is  bom  of  the  Hesh '  is  a  child,  constituted  of 

soul  and  body;  bnt '  that  which  is  born  of  the  Spirit '  is  a 

new  and  sp.ntnal  constituent  of  personal  b^in...     He  wL 

JS  Wn  of  the  .Spirit  is  constituted  of  a  '  ^irU  Z.i  ,„,iZl 

I  shall  be^  obliged  to  reserve  to  another  chapter  the  con- 
jdera  ton  of  what  '^  spirit "  is,  and  whether  his  proposition 
that  .t  ,s  never  applied  to  man  „,,  ,„„./,  "in  a  substlT.' 

nature  of  the  chOdren  of  God  is  "spirit,"  according  to  o,»^ 

*  Elpis  Israel,  p.  ;jO.  ^^     ~~    ?       ~ 

^lhess.v.  23.;      ami  awhile  afUN-wards  adds,  "  Mr.  Grant  is  auiUv  oV 
ireatrng  as  a  sci/ntific  analysis  of  hun.an  nature  a.e  fervent  nr^lo!  • 
ISM  of  an  apost!olic  benediction  ",     why  stand  stoutlv  b,  7^^ 
I  aggerated  expression  ?  —-■:   "y  ».  luvre  ex^ 

t  What  18  Man,  li.  57. 


«f 


therefore. 


"^ 


r^ 


82 


PACTS  AND  TIIKOUIKS  AS  TO  A  PUTUKK  STATK. 


V_ 


Lord's  wonls,  is  what  nono  can  with  appt'araiuo  of  truth 
deny;  but.  upon  the  face  of  what  ho  ways  himself,  his  explan- 
ation of  the  text  in  this  way  is  thorouirhly  inconsistent  and 
untrue.     For  the  "  flesh,"  he  says,  in  the  wonls  of  the  Lonl, 
John  iii.  6,  is  "  the  whole  natural  man,  and  the  entire  off- 
sprmg  of  the  natural  n^nn,  mnl  a,„l  hmbf  (p.  *J7).     The 
ajmstle  then  puts  <l<)wa  this  soul  and  body,  of  which  nothing 
good   can  come,  side  by  side  with  tlii^   new  and    spiritual 
nature,  which  (still  according  to  .Mr.  Morris'  citation  of  Gal. 
V.  17,  22-25)  it  lusts  against,  and  is  contrary  to,^ — praying 
that  they  may  be  sanctilied  togetlior!     If  this  be  liis  delib- 
erate-doctrine   I   cannpt  tell.     It   is   the   doctrine   of  his 
,  follower,  Mr.  Graff,*  Ao  has  only  carried  out  his  views  to 
their  necessary  conclusi(V,    Whether  or  no,  L  would  r^fer 
Jiim  to  Kom.  viii.  G-8  for  his  answer,  tliat  "  the  mind  of  the 
flesht  is  enmity  against  God,  for  it  is  not  subject  to  the  law 
of  God,  neither  indeed  ca.v  bk,"  and  that  is   why  "they 
that  are  in  the  flesh  cannot  please  God."    Even'  tlie  one  who 
in  the  seventh  chapten  could  say,  "  witli  the  miml  I  myself 
serve  the  law  of  God,"  had  to  add,  "  but  witli  tho/f«A  the* 
law  of  sin,"  and  if  soul  and  body  have  this  character,  poor 
hope  would  there  be  o{  their  being  "preserved  blameless- 
to  the  coming  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ !  " 

The  grossness  of.  this  mistake  lies  in  its  materialism. 
Even  Mr.  Morris,  little  as  he  wouM  like  tb  l)e  identified  with 
this,  cannot  see  in  the  "  flesh  "  anything  less  material  than  the 
body,  although  perhaps  in  coiujection  with  the  soul,  vvhich 
he  allows  to  be  in  it.  Allls  referred  to  man's  phjs'ical  con- 
stitution, but  with  this  glaring  inconsistency  with  Scripture.  ^1 
that,  whereas  the  wdrd  of  ^6d  condemns  the  flesh,  with  its 
-utter-^viVto-hopeless  destruction,  Mr.  Morris'  doctrine  puts 
the  old  nature  alouf/  side  of  the  nctn,  to  be  sanctified. 

Now,  in  tlie  text   as  to  whicli   I  have  l)een   speaking, 
1  Thess.  v.23,\it  is  plain  by  the  terms  "soul"  and  "body," 


■^rifli 


♦  III  "Oraybeanl's  Lay  Sermons." 

t  In  the  margin  "  mindiug,"  <pp6y7f/ia. 


■  ti-X 


.  '^  y- 


,  ^■r;^'^  -' '. 


-  ■'^^^'"'--'■^"^'"WW'' 


■k 


TATi:. 

iccj  of  truth 
t*  ]m  explan- 
nsistent  and 
'f  the  Lonl, 
}  entire  ofT- 
.  37).     The 
lich  nothing 
>«l    fipiritual 
tidn  of  Gal. 
o, — praying 
)e  his  (lelib- 
rino   of  his 
lis  views  to 
*voiild  r^fer 
aind  of  the 
'  to  the  law 
why  "they 
lie  one  who 
il  I  myself 
lie  Jfesh  the 
acter,  poor 
.  blameless 

lafeerialism. 
itificd  with 
ial  than  the 
loul,  which 
i/st'cal  con- 

Scripture,   \ 
sh,  with  its 
ctrine  puts 
iod. 

speaking, 
d"body," 


MAX    A    TUIUNE    BEINU. 


u 


I 


'vf 


which  are  used,  that  the  physrdat  constitution  of  man  w  spoken  " 
of;  and  it  must  bo  ociiall  y  plaj,  that  "  spirit,"  therefore,  also 
rcfeVs  to  his  physical  constitution.     The  very  paiiis  which 
Ellis  and  Head  have  taken  in  their  interpretation  to  blot  out 
all  thou-at  of  the  body  in  the  ])xssa,-(.,  is  a  proof  of  it.   It' 
would  have  been  an  Incon^'ruous  jumble,  indeed,  to  have 
said  "  disposition,  aiid  lite,  and  Wy .- "  and  they  felt  it.    Body 
in  Scripture  in  such  a  sentence  requires  "  soul "  as  its  natural 
antithesis.     '^Body  and  life"  make  no  sense,  for  the  sanctifi- 
cation  of  the  ])ody  and  its  vitaKty  (which  life  here  must 
mean)  is  scarcely  such.     And.  if,  acconling  to  Dr.  Thomas  it 
is  the  -flfsli  that  thinks,"  and  tho  brain  is  the  fleshy  tablet 
of  the  heart,  h^t  the  body  be  sanctified,  and  all  is  done.  ■  And 
it  win  not  avail  to  say  that  the  body  needs  spirit  and  soul  to 
make  it  cajiable  of  sanctification,  for  that  still  leaves  it  true 
that  the  body  is  the  only  part  that  can  be  sanctified,  and 
there  would  bd  no  sense  in  talking  of  the  sanctification  of  the 
mere  agency  hi  giving  it  life.  ^ 

But  still-and  this^is  the  only  question  weneed  further  ask 
at  present-may  not  the  "spirit »  here  refer  to  the  new  and 
sp.ritual  nature,  which,  confessedly,  the  child  of  God  has^ 
I  answer  that,  as  far  as  this,  passage  is  concerned,"  the  fact 
that  the  .-xpostle  prays  for  tho  mmtificatiaa  of  the  spirit  is 
proot  positive  that  the  new^nature  is  not  meant.*    For  the 
Scripture  doctrine  is  that,  inasmuch  as  -  that  which  is  born 
of  the  Spirit  is  spirit  »  «  whosoever  is  born  of  God  doth  not 
commit  sm,for4iis  seqd  remaineth  in  him,  and  hte  cannot  mi 
BECAUSE  he  is  born  of  God.'     I  am  well  aware  ihat  I  touch 
here  upon  groun.l  not  familiar  to  many  a  Christian;  nor- can 
I  do  more  than  touch  upon  it  either.     I  would  only  say  that 
the  one  bom  of  God  is  hero'looked  at  simply  in  his  charac- 
y^m  so  born.     The  flesli  is  not  seen,  bemg,  indeed,  in  the 
believer,  but  a^  a  Ibrelgn  thing :  -  Sin  that  dwelleth  in  me  "•  " 
(Kom.ViKlO,in  that  sense,  m.^  myself.     The  now  nature 
ojvns^o^rogic^^  ^^^  y^^^^ 

*  The  neNY  nature  fs"  spirit,"  bntnover  called  "«A<.  spirit."         _L    >. 


r^':- 


i 


m 


.« 

f 

r 

• 
• 

• 

• 

• 

*  *^ . 

■> 

k 

# 

•V-, 

/ 

i. 

u 

\                             ^ 

;                                              P 

\ 

^         . 

;      .         .s      '      '  "            *   ' 

( 

,          0                                                     ■                        _ 

108 


And  it  rtttetl  with— 

Ck)tiipr«iumr  Imm. 

Tri|)|)er, 

rxK)})*!  for  tncklti. 

Axl«)-tru«  ImiuU. 

Eye-plnto  for  liititior. 


Frifjt  l>iiff«r. 

R(>i^  HtoiM,  wit)i  huffttr. 

IKiliiird. 

FcNit  iiUnkn. 


Tlio  platfonim  |>rovi«lcMl  with  hydrnitlic!  hyffern  liuvo  no 
(;oiiipr(!MM)r  burn.  ThoHu  forfj^tiiiit  of  lOlin.  niul  over  arc  of 
the  lAiilt-up  (firth-bfliy)  gtnlor  putt«fii.  Th«  dwiirf  niul 
niiMnii»[e  aru  of  t)iO|tuiio  coiiiitrmaioii,  but  the  forinvr  Iiim 
hifi^hor  trucks  iukI  u  loiulkig  i>tfi|(f)  iiin^cq  to  thu  tVotit.  All 
platforiiift  for  gitiiH  of  )f  in.  uiid  vivor  ^ro  to  be  provided 
witJi  travertiinfj  gtar^  which  give*  g''*)'^^*)!'  facility  and  ra- 
pidity in  training  than  tackle  and  ring  boltii.  The  racer  i« 
generally  Muooth,  a  rack  racer  being  obje(;tionablu  for  land 
service ;  the  rtMir  trucks  have  to(»thed  wheeJH  fixed  to  them, 
8o  that  they  <!Hn  Iw  driven  by  the  gcaritrg.  ^ 


MANIJFACTUKE  OF  OUDNANCK. 

V  MKTAI.t). 

It  Ih  purposed  in  the  following  pagen.tu  go  bricHy  into 
the  nnmutactnre  of  the  nervice  t>r<humce,  both  S.  Ijore  and 
rifled  and  also  a  few  of  the  more  important  wtorcH  connect- 
ed with  the  various  j>iccea,  an  far  a»  is  posHible,  without 
being  able  acitmilly  to  wee  the  different  operations  pcrformo<i. 

Before  touching  on  the  nuitter  of  actual  njanufacturo  of 
ordnance,  it  is  well  to  have  some'  idea  of  the  properties  of 
the  various  metals  used  In  their  construction.  If  we  then 
consider  the  conditiont^  that  the  material  a  gun  ought  to  ■ 

fulfil,  we  can  thea  have  a  gooid  idea  mb  to  tfluit  metal,  or 
coinbination  of  metals,  will  befit  suit  our  purpose. 

Wo  will  first  discuss  briefly  those  physicial   properties  of 
metals  that  bear  more  directly, on  our  subject.     Tliese  are:  prypSeH  of 
Malleahilitij^  ductilitij,  hardness^  and  its  converse  Hoftnesvi^      Metula. 
touijhnenH^  elaHthilty^  ai»d  tennile  strength.  , 


~\ 


u 


PACTS  AMI)  TUJiUBIES  AS  TO  A  FUTU^IK  STATE. 


does  riot  sm-^annot.     The  new  nature  thus,  as  proceeding 
from  God,  is  altogether  according  to  God.     He  could  not 
.communicate  a  half-evil  thing:  "  that  which  is  bom  of  th(v 
spirit  is  spirit"— partakes,  /.  6.,  of  the  nature  of  Him  from 
whom  it  came.     Mr.  Morris  himself  says  of  it  most  truly 
"All  the  moral  qualities  of  it  answer  to  the  moral  perfection; 
of  God." .  If  so,  sin  cannot  come  from  it,  because  it  is  oi" 
God;  and,  tis  born  of  God,  we  Cannot  sin.     Therefore  you 
cannot   talk   of  sanctifying   //.     It    is   of    God:    therefore 
already  wholly  good. 

And  *'  spirit "  is  not  here  the  "  motion  of  the  soul,  as  Mr. 
Morris  elsewhere  strangely  defines  it,  for  the  soul  is  men- 
tioned apart,  and  there  would  be  no  sense  in  speaking  of  the 
sanctifying  of  the  soul  and  of  its  motions.  Sanctify  it,  and 
its  motions  will  be  sanctified. 

We  return  then  with  confidence  to  our  first  conclusion  : 
'Spirit  and  soul  and  body"  are  the  man      The  ample  con- 
firmation  of  this  by  every  part  of  Scripture  will  oome  out 
as  we  now  take  up  in  detail  these  constituent  parts. 


i 

r 

J 

'i 

mci 

M 

tna 

1 

Bol 

i 

and 

1 

wha 

1 

this 
is   D 

1 

betv 

i 

whe 

1 

"Th 

*  r 

soun 
whit 

Here 

' 

conti 

i 

them 
guag( 

4 

name 

m 

more 

1 

shoul( 

% 

activii 

1 

Spirit 

-'M 


♦Tlu 

v^  «r  caus 

leally  tl 

jiderath 

place  to 

tin  X 

well-kno 

poor  dui 


'-^-~ 


ATE. 

proceeding 
e  could  not 
bom  of  the 
r  Him  from 
most  truly 

perfiection : 

ise  it  is  oi" 

srefore  you 

therefore 

soul,  as  Mr. 
aul  is  men- 
tking  of  the 
itify  it,  and 

jpnclusion  : 
ample  coii- 
l  oome  out 
ts. 


THE  SPIEIT  OP  GOD. 


35 


*4 
,1 


-  chapt|:h  III. 

■   . "       ■  > 
THE   SPIRIT  OF    OOI). 

The  word  which  stands  for  "spirif"  in  the  Old  Testa 
ment  .s  n,.  (w.),  i«  the  New  Testament,  ....«„  (p^l 
>»a)_  rhej  are  words  precisely  of  the  same  significance 
Both  are  denved  from  words  which  mean  "  to  breathe - 
and  IB  their  primary  sense  therefore  sicnifv  '  breath  "'„r 
what  is  a  kindred  thought,  air  in  ,noul-  .4-iiid."  From 
this  as  the  typo  of  me,oU^  acHmty,  itS  meaning  of  "  spiru" 
s  most  evidently  and  easily  derived.  The  comparison 
towe^i  the  two  is  what  the  Lord  makes  in  Joto  S^ 
where  the  same  word pnccna isboth  •'  wind  " and  " spirit "  • 

so?ndT  r  r"  ^'''"'  '*  "^"'''''  -"  f"-  bearTst  the 
rhilruTe^KT.""™'  "»'  tell  whence  it  eometh  or 
Whither  It  goeth,  so  «  every  one  that  is  bbm  of  the  SoirU  " 

e^nirtS ''*'  """'""  ""f -visible  activit;bCnd   # 
eontro  ,  ">«  effects  are  manifest,  the  power  which  produces 
them  unseen  and  uncontrollable.    I„  the  format! onTJT 

ii^dt^irar-r^S^^^^^ 

activity  acts  nnseen  and  nnc'onTr:,  'd  '  "Zr"  gJ^'' 
Spirit,.,  and  ^he  third^rson  of  the  Tring,  Jhom  .>„■; 

really  ih.  same  .^  ."  ■•  calse  ilZl^^^"  ", '  °  '"'°""    ""^  '"-  - 
Plac  .„  represent  trbll:::";:*  ""  '*'  "'^  ^"'^"'™'' '"  ""-'       ' 


36 


FACTS  AM)  TUEOKIES  AS  Tt>  A  t'UTUKK  STATE. 


(( 


ture  represents  as  the  immediate  mover,  both  in  creation 
and  in  new  creation,  Is  pre::mmently  the  "  Spirit  of  God." 

To  all  this,  indeed,  on  bohalt'  of  materialism,  Mr.  Roberts 
has  made  sundry  objections,  the  answer  to  which  need  not 
detain  us  long.  Ho  tells  us :  "  A  substantive  derived  from  a 
verb  draws  its  meaning  from  the  act  expressed  by  the  Verb. 
Ruach  is  ruach,  because  it  is  the  thing  niarhr  J^  so  to  speak, 
and  not  because  tlic  act  of  ruaching  is  inyisil)le."  But  that 
has  to  do  with  the  primary  meaning  of  words  only,  and  not 
with    the    secondary,   of    which    alono    we    are.  si^eaking. 

Breath  "  is  the  thintj^^eathod,  no  <loubt,  but  if  I  speak  of 
"a  breath  of  air,''  I  do  not  speak  of  anything  breathed.  I 
apply  the  word  "  breath  "  in  a  secondary  sense,  to  something 
which  in  some  way  it  rescinl)les.  Tliis  secondary  sense  has 
nothing  to  do  with  tlie  der'n-atloi)  ol"  the  word  at  all,  as  a 
"  breath  of  air  "  is  not  a  thing  breathed  forth,  but  only  com- 
pared to  that  which  is.  John  iii.  8  shows  us,  for  pnmintt, 
the  real  ground  of  comparison  between  its  primary  and  sec- 
ondary meanings:  an  illustiatlon  wliidi  ::\Ir.  Roberts  silently 
passes  by,  in  order  thai  he  may  be  al)]o  to  speak  of  this  view 
of  the  matter  as  an  '  o]>lnion  having  no  deeper  foundatioi? 
than  the  ingenuity  of  thos.e^ho  have  given  birth  to  the  spec- 
ulation." * 

Meanwhile,  ho  himself  jiuts  fortlrlvliat  is.  really  that,  that 
"  the  power  which'  glVes  lifo  was  itself  in  the  first  instance 
spirited  (breathed  forth)  from  the  Eternal  Source  of  life  and 
light."  To  this,  moreover,  we  answer  by  bringing  forward 
the  passag^^^wh/ch  Mr. -R.  rightly  foresees^' will  be  a^^ainst 

seeking  to  impross  with  Ihc  I'lct  ..f  t!).?  W.ivj,  of  G  >  I.  ^.1,1  her  Uiat  he 
had  been  lookinf?  evcrywli'To  for  God,  Imt  could  not  fitid  IThu.  "  Tlici'f 
was  •  God.  NO  ■ :  "  She  took  up  a  pair  of  heliows.  and  blew  a  pufTat  his 
hand,  which  was  red  wiih  eold  on^  a  winter's  day.  He  showed  si^nsof 
displeasure,  toliilier  it  made  lils  liands  oohl,  while  slie,  h>okin?  at  the 
pipe  of  the  belloivs,  told  liini  slie  could  see  jiolli'.nz.  "  there  was  '  wind, 
no':"  ''  He  opened  his  eyes  very  wide,  stared  at  tne,  and  panted,  a 
deep  crimson  suffused  his  whole  face,  an.d  a  soul,  a  real  soul,  shone  in 
his  strangely  altered  countenance,  while  lie  triumphantly  repeated, 
'God  like  wind  !     (iod  like  wind  '.  ' 


TT"':^ 


ATE. 

in  cieation 
of  God." 
[r.  Roberts 
1  need  not 
Lved  from  a 
y  the  V^^erb. 

0  to  speak. 
But  that 

ly,  and  not 
si^eaking. 

1  speak  of 
'cathed.     I 

something 
'  sense  has 
at  aU,  as  a 

only  corn- 
er pni'Mmn, 
'Y  and  sec- 
Its  silently 
f  this  view 
foundatioi? 
3  the  spec- 

thht,  thai 
It  instance 
of  life  and 
!?  forward 
be  against 

lior  that  lie 
m.  "TluTf 
\  |)uff  at  his 
Pfl  signs  of 
kin:T  at  the 
was '  wind, 
rl  panted,  a 
il,  shone  in 
'   repeated, 


THE  SPIKIT  O*"    GOD, 


37 


-him--"  God  is  a  Spirit."*     Who  breathed  forth,  then,  this 
Spirit  which  God  is  ?    Was  God  HimselUn  emanation  from 
somethmg  eLstL?    Mr.  K.  anticipates  this  objection,  abd  trie,. 
to  provide  for  it  by  telling  us  that  "  spirit "  «  comes  by  asso- 
ciation with  subsequent  manifestation,  to  stand  in  its  New 
Testament  use  as  the  synonym  of  the  Divine  nature':  but  this 
hy  as^^^cutt.>n  vrcrdy,  and  not  by  philological  derivation.'' 
But  how,  then,  is  he  so  sure  that  there  is  -  philological  deri- 
vation    m  the  former  case  ?     This   is  evirlently  a  second 
conjecture  to  uphold  the  previous  one,  and  as  baseless  as  the 
former.     For,  with  so-called  Christadelphlanism,  as  is  well 
known,  the  theory  is,  that  while  "  spirit  "  is  a  thing  '<  spirited 
torth     from  God,  orU  of  this  spirit  all  things  were  ma<le. 
,How  strange  and  contradictory  .to  take,  then,.  what%,  so  to 
speak   the  m..  ,naferU,l  of  all  creation,  and   to   confodnd 

I    ^,      .V^^^  ^"^'^  -^  ^'^'•^  nature-creation  and  Creator  being  so 
I    laentihed  as  one  !  . 

[  _    ilater;ai;.;m  h,«  tlms  not  shrunk  from  assail ing,  along  with 
^0  GoJhcaa  of  the  .Son,  the  Personality  of  the  Holy  Ghost, 
^dthis  ,s  not  confino.1  even  to  the  followers  of  Dr.  Thomas 
The  interpretation  of ''spirit-  a  lopte.!  by  Ellis  and  Read' 
borrowed,  .t  would  seen,,  by  or  from  the  f.rmer,  tends  di' 
rectly  the  same  way.    Miles  Grant,  as  we  have  seen,  makes 
a  more  mflueuee.     But  Dr.  Thomas  it  is  who  has  formu 
lated  ..ho  d,,t,,    ,  ,3  b,f„,,  ^^^     Accordins  to  him,  the. 
bp.nt  of  God  .s  electricity,  or,  combined  with  nitrogen  and 
oxygon,  th*  atmosphere,   which  Job  calls  the  "breath  of 

W  ?h      tT       f  ' "  ^^'  ""'""•'^'  ^''  '■»"''»•'"■.  it  «  proved 

by  the  shakmg  of  the  honse  on  the  .lay  of  Pentecost,  and 

he  cnergizmg  of  hamson's  muscles,  when  it  came  on  him  to 

electrietty  .  The  doctrme  is  developed  in  full  in  his  fifth 
locturo,  that  God  is  a  material  being,  furrounded  by  a  kiLa 
of  electncal  atmosphere,  so  d:mi:„g  and  consuming  in  H^ 
.mmedmte  presence,  as  to  be  called  "  light;  unapproaehablc,H 
Ibl^Mvhieh^attenuycd^bj  d.giwMaJhe_ma^al  out  of 

m^  '  '*         *Johniv.  24.  ""^ 


I 


■ki. 


88  FACTS  AKD  TH£OltI£S  AS  TO  A  SVf VRE  STATE. 

Which  He  creates  all  things,  and  by  which  He  becomes  cog- 
nizant of  everything,  and  executes  His  purpose  in  the  whold 
domain  of  the  universe.    This  is  the  ruach,  the  principle/of 
life  in  the  nostrils  of  all  flesh,  which  the  foolish  anjmals  "  use 
all  up  "  in  the  mere  process  of  existence,  but  which  wiser  man 
can  use  to  move  tables,  read  unopened  letters,  and  even 
(when,  in  a  high  state  of  nervous  susceptibility)  to  perceive 
"distant  facts  and  occurrences !    "  \Vh'en  concentrated  under 
the  Almighty's  will,"  it  "^  becomes  Aohj  spirit,  as  distmct 
from   spirit  in  its  free,  spontaneous  form;"  in  which  way 
apostles  received  k,  but  «  it  is  given  to  none  in  the  present 
day."     In  "  evolving  a  new  man  "in  people,  "  the  Spirit  has 
ao  participation  except  in  the  shape  of  the  written  word. 
The  present  days  are  barren  days,  as  regards  the  SpirYt^s 
direct  operations."  * , 

All  this  is  but  the  legitimate  fruit  o^  materialistic  teach- 
g.    It  is  essential  to  its  self-consistency  that  the  Pers< 


m 


Personality 


of  the  Spirit.af  God  be  denied..  Once  get;  rid  of  Him  as  a 
Person,  put  Him  upon  the  list  of  material  forces— let  it  be ' 
electricity  or  anything  else  you  please— and  pknly  you  have  " 
at  once  reduced  the  .spirit  of  man  also  id  something  just  as 
unintelligent,  and  as  well  suited  to  the  purpose  they  desire  to 
accomplish.     The  atatement  I,bave  given  from  Mr.  Roberts' 
bo6kmaynot  seem  to  need  reply,  nor  anything  but  its  simple 
utterance,  to  condepin  it  •  sufliclently.     Nevertheless  I  shall 
answer  it;  for  in  these  days  of  wide-spread  infidelity,  God. 
alone  knows  in  what  unlooked-for  places  ^e  answer  may  be 
heeded.     Nor  does  the  gross  folly  which  marks  it  all  hinder 
its  reception.     Man  has  no  wis^dom  apart  from  the  word  of 
truth,  and,  once  astray  from  that,  the  apostolic  declaration  is 
fulfilled,  "  professing  to  be  wise,  they  became  fools.'^    How 
like,  too,  to  what  is  now   oc«upy;ng  us,   that   ^hich  he 
goes  onto  say !— "  and  changed  the  glory  of  the  inQ«#ruptible  , 

God  il^tOAN^   IMAGE   MADE  LIKE  TO  COBBUPTIBLE  MAif  '  " 

(Roim  I  22.  23).  . 


*  Twelve  Lectures,  pp.  110-125. 


-^--4- 


■■      /■■■     ■    .    ■ 


•■  i  ■ 


fATB. 

•ecomes  cog- 
in  the  whold 
prmciple,of 
nimals  "  use 
h  wiser  man 
s,  and  even 
to  perceive 
;rated  under 
as  distinct 
which  way 
the.  present 
le  Spirit  has 
•itten  word, 
the  Spintf's 

listic  teach- 
Personality 
)if  Hinl  as  a 
'8 — letit  be- 
lyyou  have 
ling  just  as 
e^  desire  to 
[r.  Roberts' 
It  its  simple 
less  I  shall 
lelitv,  God-, 
*ver  may  be 
t  all  hinder 
\e  word  of 
claration  is 
ols^    How 
^hich  he 
Q<#ruptible , 

LE  MAN"!" 


THE  8PIBIT  OP   GOD. 


f 


^/f- 


-;( 


-  39 

Soriptnre  disowns  this  system  in  all  its  narts     Tn  '«„„• 
tare  tl>e  Spiritiof  God  is  a'person,  divine  an^tellLtT?" 
the  things  of  God;    Just  as.  "  wha;  n„n  L,ower,Kht~ 

This  is  as  different  from  Mr.  Grant's  "  infl'nence  "  or  Mr 
Roberts'  "  medium  ■•  through  which  the  Deity  reteives^ 
presswns   (m«eh    as  the  human  ear  sound    throTh  2 

a^osp  ere)  but  itself  asnnconscious  as  theaUS-if 
Which,  indeed,  accordino-  to  Thom««  if  ^^ 

we.,  be  conceived.     «  The  SpiritrXfSmi^r;:-  Z 
deep  things  of  God "  (ver  10>      V^f  r  a  S  '  ^    '  **'® 

^piK.  as  Mr.  K  wo  JhL^.^  huftt  SSt^its 
ahd    knows.     Moreover    ao-iin     "  tt   ^  \.     '  s^drcnes 

hearts »  /  ^-   r/i  u  u  ?   ?'  '    ""^   "^^^  searcheth    the 

whi^h  1-  -  ;  "t°o^eth  what  is  the  mind  of  the  Spirit" 
^;ch  hvmg  and  active,  «  itsk|^  maketh  ihtercess^^ 
as       according  to  God  v  (Rom.'viii.  26,  27)     .         ''''°/°'- 

It  this  IS  not  the  announcemeht  of  an  intellicrpnf  T> 
words  cannot  convey  the  idea  of  one.    "^ 
have  it  that  it  is  all  what  he  is  fond  of  caUfe^^  Tl" 

fictiohs  of  human  speech"   OftlT        ^^    f    the  inevitable 

__^''^^^^_fPffch^^fthep^8age8from  Corinthians 

*  Mr.  Roberts  objects  against  this  — "  tk^wI^  \7 — —        ■ 

iiieaotocontenilthatthesDiril.nfml'  "o".  does  Mr,  Grant 

r«,«ire.,rh,  Uright  in  main  JlrL  he  Spril^^o"' ■•"■'''"  ^""'^ 
knowing  the  iSings  „f  o„d,  another  „er,„„°  ^  "  °"»  P"""""' 

Mr  Oram's  vi,„  require,  nothing  of  the  sort     Th..Mk.     -- 
are  j„,t  human  thing,,  a,  .•  the  things  of  Go""  amdlvln.  i'!^   """J*  " 
not  a  qnestion  of  another  ne™in  In  .r.i.       "    ,"'*""'!'»  ""ngs.    It  is  . 

0,,d*„^divine  things-  therriLt"'"'-.  ""'  "  ^"^  SP'*  <>' 

inrg'ncrCMr'  S~'^  -T"-"  -'c'-ne„  .„d    \ 
of  the  spirit  of  man  andThh  f  1  <>' .'""■•»  '"is  infers  the  personalty 

;we^doe^a.niy;::;^rt^frr:r.!;;-A  -"'  .'■■•  ^^o  ^ 


'*    us 


■/ 


its  own  place, 


r  1  ™'  "  ''"^  -P°"»'  point.  wVi'chwm 


personality  in  mail  is. in 
come  up  agaiq.ifl 


V 


■  '.  * 


\ 


I 


40  FACTS  AXI)>riU;:OUJ,KS,AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.     ■  ' 

ho  says*  "This  describes  the  apostolic  r-lrp^^r/.^ce  of  the  7'. 
Spirit,"  which;-"  to  Tni:iK  sensations,  as  we  may  say,  was 
separately  from    th.msvlvos    an    Enlij^^htoner "  Penetrator. 
Comforter,  Witness,  an.l    tluT^-lbro    aescnbo<l  m  language 
that.n./<?.-   as  if  these  functions  were   porsonaUy  separate 

from  the  Father.'*  .  \^«  ,  .  '' 

So  then  it  Wr>.^  road  as  if  the  Spirit  of  ( iod  were  a  person  .   j 
The  truth  is.  al-tcr  utl.  too  stfong  for  the  theory.     But  then   ■ 
this  isme^eh-a  .lescription,  aceorrUng  to  the  human  sensa-- 
tion  '     Is  it  'true,  then,  that  to  their  human  sensations  the'  _ 
Spirit  of  Goa  ^^•as  not  only  separate  from  themselves,  hut 
from  the   Father   al,.o  ?     H'onv  dM  the  '■  ser.sation      difter^   . 
from  what  it  wot.Id  -have  hcen  had  the  Father  spoken  apn- ' 
from  this  ^     Could  thev  not  help  descnihin-  it  hy  misldad.i.  :    ^ 
words'-'     Mr.    RuLeffs   himself  can 'and    docs   describe   it 
differeutlv.     Whv  not  the  apostles  r    The  words  <!»  read  as 
'  if  the  Spirit  .of  God  mMC  a  person,  our  adversaries, tliem 
selves  being  judgc.s  ;  an.Ulyy  speak  not  merely  of  mspired 
knowled-c.;  but  of  the  c^iKtu^'l/  <'/  //"i  .>^^--'^  to,.reyeal. 
/And  the;  is  iurther  added  (ver.  12),  "Now  .sy  have  receivca 
'   the  Spirit '-—this  Spirit  .so  c.oujpetfnt  in  knowledge—   that 
we  mi'dit  know."      T/.  h-  knowledge  is  distingulyhed  from 
the  Spirit's  knowledge  ;   and  the  doctrine  is  comprcte  that 
theirs  proceeds  from  their  reception  of  One,  who  had  it  m^ 
Ills  own  power  to  impart  dlls  to  them.. 

The  ar<uiment  that  the  ,Si.irit  of  God  is  in  the  nostrils, and 
so  a  mere-principle  of  life  in4n  living,  because  Job  xxva.  3, 
in  the  common  version,  >  peaks  so,  I  can  only  say  is  w<.rthy  ol 
men  who,  when  thev  choose,  can  quote  Cireek  and  Hebrew^ 
abundantly,  but  who  are  plea.sed  vo  Jgnore  in  this  case 'the 
fact  that 'one   of  the  commonest   renderings   o?  j'uoch  a^ 
breath  ;  and  that  .the  expression  refers  to  Gen:  ii.  7,t  where 
the  word  for  '•  breath  of  life  -  is  a  word  which  is  never  ap- 
plied to  the  Spirit  of  G6d  at  aik     And,  jnoreover,  so  far  is  • 


*  Man  MorUl,  i>.  2'). — -■ — 

t  Roberta  allows  tl.i^  mimI  vet  ibinks  it  "  look>^  as  much  like  u  inanoju 
vTe  as  posfiible."  and  spends  a  full  ,.ai:e  in  lu-vintr  (what  n.>  one  will 


•ifa. 


1:1 


'K.     ■  '         , 

',e  of  the   Y  ,  I 

say,  was 
mctrator. 
lant'uai'e  ' 

separate 

a  person  !  " 
But  then 
I  an  scnsa-  • 
alions  the? 
;elves,  l)Ut 

ilam  apn  ' 
iiisl:?acUii  : 
eycrlbe  it 
<?(>  cead  as 
rioHo.theni- 
•f  Inspired 
tOy.reveal. 
c  received 
Ige— "  that 
>hcd  ftpm 
ipTcte  that 
)  had  it  in 


'vhe  sFiiiiT  or  ood. 


4i 


ostrils,  and 
>b  xxvii.  3, 
worthy  of 
id  Hebrew^ 
iis  case 'the 
>f  runch  is 
.  7,t  where 
s  never  ap- 
;r,  so  far  is 

iko  u  inanoeu 
at  no  one  will 


•:1 


Scripture  from  asserting  that  the  Spirit  of  God  is.m  all  men 
.^. that  It  speaks  ol  Christians  expressly  as  those  "who  have 
_  received  the  Spirif,  which  is  of  God.'  " 

■  The  proof  is  Indeed  abundant  and  decisive  as  to  this,  which 
is_^lone^spit.  of  .Mr  ,, Roberts'  protest)  Subversive  of  theTr 

n^acn  in  each  ca^e.  is  .,„i„Iont  to  ns.er.i^ 'ft^^  "^^^  "r^^^''^' 

.     cons.,ler    such    passages   as    those :     '  Whether   sl^^llf  .^" ' 

.     >M.at  conclusion  can  we  come  to  from  t h  s  bd    th.^  t  "^^   '^^ 

1nvi.«ibf,>   powoi-   (,r  ener^v  m.I-...  Vr  ,  '  "'"vorsal  Spirit, 

called  Spirit,  or  thn'Su  V^'  ,  i?  ^'''^  ^'-^^^er,  and  therefore 
hath  „i,e  nu.  Z^::^l^J'Tl^''^"'^'''-^'^^  ''''■•='  '^^  ««^ 
(Job  xxxiii.  4).    .A..;r<?io„  ,      "?  "  "''■^"   ^''^•"'    '"«   "f«' 

created-  (Psa    cW^  'u  .'"'f''  ^"'■'''   '^^^y  Spirit,  they  are 

Himself  Uis'SvinniruarhfJuiir)       ^         "'•^'  '^*'  "'^  g''^^l^«''  t^' 
■Pensh  together,  and  :rS:::^^^^^^ 

Here  we  havo.the  •itron'rf  I,  nf  At.'   n" ,  '  ^"^"^  ^•^'^'^-  l^)." 

/«.,and  that  Ik^Us  To  |    /n  n      ^^^^'"'^^  ^^^>'^*^--     "o."  plain  it  is 

port-to  ill  wh:;:;:^^r^;;y--'>'<^'^  ju^  ^^^-^  "-p- 

nor  flee  from  the  presenoe  ,.f  God     1       .         '""""'  ^'^Z'"^'"  ^^'^  Spirit,     '' 

"irradiated ^^n^y .:!:::.::::.::: li;^ ^^^^^  ^^^ ;r  >^  - 

Boborls  i,,  thai  l.c  -s  ,„  „i„„,„,„  ,  „,.,?.  '  "°°'"''  "'">  Mr- 


•4. 


42  FACTS  AND  THEOBIKS  AS  TO  A  FUTURK  STATE. 

whole  theory.     T6t  it  is  no  work  of  the  Spirit  that  is  in 
question,  as  he  would  make  it,  but  the  reception  of  the  Spirit 
Himself     Nor  was  (as  he  affirms)  the  /  aching  of  the  Spirit 
ever  called  thp  Spirit.  The  Lord's  words  induced  were  "  spir.t," 
but  not  the  Spirit  of  God ;   and  "  the  Spirit  is  truth  "  surely, 
characteristically,  just  as  is  the  Lord  Jesus  (John.  xiv.  G) ; 
but  in  neither  case  does  that  destroy  personaUty.     All  the 
way  through  Scripture  we  find  language  which  defies  accom- 
modation "to  this  lowest  depth  of  materialism.     If  I  begin 
with  Genesis  (xli.  38)  I  find  Joseph  spoken  of  as  a  "man  m 
whom  [distinctively]  tM  Spirit  of  God  /.."     In  Jude  W, 
some,  even  of  professing  Christians  are  described  as  "  sen- 
sual, having  not  the  Spirit."     So  I  find  in  Gal.  iv.  G,  that 
''because  ye  are  sons,  God  hath  sent  forth  UheSpint  of  His 
Son  into  your  hearts,  crying,  Abba,  Father  !  '^    [Was^  this 
merely  "truth"  that  God  sent  into  their  hearts?  and  were 
they  sons  Wore  they  had  received  it  V]     And  again,  "Ye 
are  not  in  the  flesh  but  in  the  Spirit,  if  so  be  that  the  Spirit 
of  God  dwell  in  you;"  and  then  it  is  addled,  "Now  if  any 
man  have  not  the  Spirit  qf  Christ,  he  is  none  of  IIW'  (Rom. 
viii.  9).     Solemn  utterance,  indeecT,  for  men  who  have  to 
confess  that  they  have  no  "  Holy  Spirit":  for  only  by  the 
Ilolff  Ghost  u'lmnto  us  is  "  the  love  of  God  shed  abroad  in 

usTancTthe  breath  of  tlie  Almiohiy  given  us  life.     Does  ihat  prove  llial 
the  Spirit  of  God  is  only  breath  1     And  if  so,  how  1 

Again,  in  what  why  does  God  send  forth  His  Spirit  when  He  creates, 
according  to  Mr.  R.  1  To  us  it  looks  very  much  like  the  doctrine  of  a 
living,  personal  agent,  in  which  we  believe. 

So^as  to  Acts  xvii.  28,  the  niaterialism  is  all  his  own. 

In  the  last  passage,  allowing  his  reading  of  it  (which  some  accept), 
God's  Spirit  need  not  surely  be  impersonal,  because  the  maintainer  of 
life  in  all  created  existences,  nor  is  it  identified  with  the  spirit  of  man. 

This  is,  then,  the  total  result  of  the  appeaVto  Scripture  as  to  this  so 
weighty  a  point  to  be  established,  and 'in  face  of  Scriptures,  which  (it  is 
owned)  do  read  as  if  the  Spirit  of  God,were  a  distinct  person  in  the  God- 
head. ,,  With   Mr.  Roberts  the  Spirit  is  the  material  of  creation ;   in 


Scripture  the  Creator,  as  indeed  he  owns :  thoughts  which  are  conira- 
dictory  of  each  other,  as  long  as  Creator  and  creature  are* distinct  in 
more  than  name.^ 


i    • 


:;i 


THE  SPIKIT  OF   OOD. 


48 


our  hearts ''  (Rom.  v.  5) ;  aud  "  the  kingdom  of^God  is  not 
meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness,  and  peace,  and  joy  in 
the  Holy  Spirit"  (ch,  xiv.  17).  If  that  be  withdrawn,  there 
is  no  more  "communion  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (2  Cor.  xiii. 
14) ; /no.  more  "sealing  "to  the  day  of  redemption  (Eph.  iv. 
30) ;  no  more  "renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost"  (Titus  iii.  5). 
Sad  work  indeed,  if  this  he  true!  and  barren  days  indeed! 
But  what  an  adcouht  for  men  to  give  of  themselves,  that 
they  have  no  commun|on,  no  renewing,  no  sealing,  no  peace, 

.  no  joy,  no  love  of  God  in  their  hearts  I  They  have  pro- 
nounced their  condemnation  with  their  own  lips,  when  they 
say  that  the  only  Spirit  of  God  they  know  is  one  subject  to 
men's  wills,  and  "used  up "  by  animals  "in  the  mere 
process  of  existence."  .-^ 

Yet  Mr.  Roberts  allows   that  this  (impersonal !)  Spirit 
"  was  a  teacher,  more  paticularly  in  the  apostolic  era,  when 
it  was  bestowed  on  all  who  believed  the  word,  enabling, 
them  to  work   miracles,   speak   with"  tongues,  understand 

^  mysteries,  according  as  the  Spirit  willed  " !  How  strange 
an  impersonality  is  this  !  creating,  teaching,  searching, 
willing,  bearini^,  knowing,  and  yet  not  a  person  !  Of  <?ourse 
this  language  must  be  understood  as  mere,  strangely  con- 
tradictory, human  speech.  Scripture  seems  to  say  this.  We 
must  believe  it  to  mean  something  that  it  never  even 
seems  to  say ! 


7 


•  ^^ 


44  FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FT7TTTKE  STATE. 


CHAPTER  IV. 


THE    >l'i;:lT    OP    MAX. 


\ 


The  second  application  of  the  word  '-spirit"  is  to  angelic 
beings,  and  thai  wbL-thcr  •  holy  ""  or  "  unclean."' 

The  application  of  the  word  in  this,  way  is  again  deniedv 
by  Thomaslsm  ds  to  the  latter  class,  but  this  is  scarcely  the 
place  to  examine  what  th-y  say  on  this  head.  It  will  suffice 
f'')r  our  present  purpo^f^  that  there  rt/vj  spirits  whose  exist- 
ence as  separate  personalities  cannot  be  denied.  And  if 
♦his  be  so,  there  is  no  rut^on,  at  least  lK,'ff>rehand,  why  man's 
•spirit  also  shoujd  not  be  an  individuality,  a  real  and  living 
entity,  though  in  him  tVnited  to  a  body  wliich  is  of  dust.* 

And  this  is  the  third  applieaiion  of  the  word  to  which  we 
must  now  devote  particular  attention.      -  ^ 

•"A  cloud  of  dust  is  here  on«lcavored  to  be  raised  by  the. 
assertion  of  tl'c  wondTii'al  variety  of  meanings  given  to  the 
word.    Yet,  if  we  talc-  ilic  huiiruagc  <»f  oi;rcoi:i;iion  English 
version  as  a  guide,  and  ictc-r  to  the  pas^agc^  in  which  it. 
■  relates  to  man,  we  find,  us  the  translation  of  tlic  Old  Testa- 

*  Iloljerts  a:»>«erts  that  •l"  a:)''pl,>  mo"  visihlo,  p!c>rious.  incorrupt- 
ible, corporeal,  bc-iims,"'  rnaii's  spirit    hc'.ivj^the    '>ppos;if    <>i  all    this. 

Cut—-  ■     •  ~"    *    /■'.■  ■    .■, 

,•  (\.)  The  siroplo  question  is  as.  to  the  osistence  of  iaiiividual  "spirits," 
•vhich  is  acknouledijed.  Difffifn'-f'  Vif  rondifion  frvn  :;i  nr>wise  alter 
:he  ar^umenf  fioui  this.  ^ 

(2.)  The  visibility  of  the  human  spirit  .n«>ms  much  on  a  ]  ir  with  that 
of  angels.  Neither  Ms  or'iinarily  -ffn  fcofnpnrp  2  Kinas  ^i.'lT).  Both 
Aacc  been.     ^  , 

(3.)  IIow  man  :;  spirit  i.s  "  decaying;, "  Mr,  R.  man  explain. 

(4.)  Corporeality  i;;  not  provo  1  for  angels  by  examples  in  which  God 

(as  in  Gen.\3Cviii.  and  xxxii  t.  or  an^el  appeared  at^  men.     This  is  not 

.manifestation  of  angelic  ntauio-,  I>ul  the  aiSMimntion  »if  hnnnn  form  by 


\ 


I 


I 


'  ^he8e.     There  may  bo  mystery  in  tliis.  no  iloubt.     We  soon  touch  the 
bouods  of  our  knowledge,  that  is  all. 


THE   HPIHIT   OF   MAX. 


48 


\ 


f 


ment    Hebrew  word,    but  ^ve  words    used :    '*  breath," 

"  splint,"  '•  aTi^cr,"  "  cour-ige,"  "  mind."  And  of  the  New 
Tcstaaacnt  Greek  word  corresponding  to  it  nothing  but 
"ghost"  or  "spirit"  (which  everybody  knows  to  be  in- 
tended for  the  same  thing)  and  n/rra  *'  lUc."  wrongly,  in  Rev. 
xiii.  1.'),  wliere  it  ought  to  bo  rather  ''br6atli.'  ThlJ^looks 
more  lilvc  uniformity  In  thu  matter,  and  a  common  idea  run- 
ning throughout,  than  some  wouhi  wish  to  have  us  suppose. 
Of  course  I  do  not  mean  to  deny  that  there  are  various 
sf-coadary  applications  of  the  word  '-spirit"  itself.  This 
concerns  us  the  less  because  there  is  no  jioubt  of  the 
primary  meaninjj  of  the  En«.;lish  word.  But  surely  the 
greater  the  variety  of  meaning,  the  more  needful  to  look  for 
the  key  (which  must  bj  somewhere),  the  possession  of 
which  will  enable  u.^  to  find  harmony  in  these  various  uses. 
of  the  word  instead  of  discord.  ' 

The  fact  is,  that  the  only  key  to  this  hidden  harmony  is 
in  an  application  of  the  wor/i  which  these  writers  almost  to 
a  man  reject,  viz.,  ko  a  real  intelligent  entity*  in  the  com- 
pouhd  nature  of  man,  of  <^//7  mon  as  such,  "the  spirit  of  man, 
which  is  in  him,"  placed' at  the  head  of,  as  well  as  in  con- 
nection witli,  his  othc^  cf>nstrituent  paj-ts  by  tHc*apostle, 
where  he  speaks  to  the  The/salonians  of  the  sanctlfication 
of  thetr  "whole  spirit  and  s6ul  and  body."     Let  us  take  up 

*  Mr.  Rubcrt.->  trios  to  show  tl.is  cannot  bo  iho  kc^v  bv  'insertinT 
"  intelligent  entity  "  in  place  of  "  .spirit "  in  such  passages  as  i  K^ngs  x.  6» 
''There  was  no  more  iuUV.iQcnt  entity  in  hor,"  etc.  This  may  do  to 
raise  a  laugh^  but  it  ib  in  fact 'mere  childish  absurdity.  ThcMO  would 
We  no  .secondary  nyeaninffs  at  all,  if  the  primary  oho  could  be  iuserted 
instead  of  them.  / 

How  tfio  key  above  rnentioned  doca-"^i  tho  lock  all  round,"  will  be 
seen  g^^Vward,^hap.  vi.  '  That  Mr.  Roberts' key  does  not  may  bo  easily 
seei^^y  the  meanings  assigned  ;o  "  .'-nl^H  "  hi  various  connections  by 
birftself  and  his  leader,  t)r.  Thomas,  in  p.  23  of  "  Man  Mortal,"  he 
define.s  it  as  " mind  " ;  1  p  30.  "breath  of  life  ";  p.  54,  "abstract 
energy  "  ;  p.  6e).  "  life  "  ;  p.  iiT,  "  conscience  " ;  while  Pr.  Thomas  says 


that  "  ■~pLr:'s  in  prison  "  H  Potor  iii.)  means  "  bodies." 
■  Qa  thu  otlioi-  hand,  t^h**  lyi'lji  is  fhns.  for  T)-.  Th'")ias,  hoflv,  nud  son!, 
'find  S7>irit.  .  ? 


46  FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

the  proofs  of  this,  examining  tiiem  carefully  as  the  impor- 
tance of  the  subject  demands,  an<l  submit  the  separate  points 
to  be  examined,  one  by  one,  to  the  test  which  Annihilation- 
ists  themselves  appeal  to— the  judgment  of  the  inspired 

word.     '/     I 

Now  it  is  but  quoting  Scripture  to  speak  of  the  "  spirit  of 
man  which  is  in  him"  (1  Cor.  ii.  11),  and  of  the  "  spirits  of 
men  "  (Ileb.  xii.  2;J).  And  observe,  before  we  pass  on,  one 
fact  here.  Scripture  says  *'  the  n^nnf  of  ma/ir  It  does  not 
sayV  the  8y>irit"  but  "the  «/>/>//«  of //<cw."  Annihilationists 
t^ell  W  (or  many  of  them)  that  '  spirit "  is  a  universal 
/principle  bf  life,  lent  to  m.m  indeed  in  common  with  the- 
r  beast,  but  forming  no  real  part  of  himself,  like  the  air  he 
breathes,  ami  in  which  Dr.  Thomas  says  it  is  contained. 
Now,  if  th  s  be  so,  we  might  as  well  talk  about  the  hr.afhi 
of  men  as  I  of  the!  r  Mj,irlt.s  Yet  every  one  would  perceive 
the  incongruity  of  the  former  expression.  Wfe  say  "the 
breath  of  ^en,"  just  because  it  is  one  common  breath  they 
all  breatlW,  but  it  is  not  one  common  spirit  they  all  have, 
and  therefore  we  speak  of  their  "  spirits,"  because  each  has 
his  own,ind  it  is  a  separate  entity  in  each  one.* 

Mr.  donstable's  identification  of  it  with  the  "breath  of 
life  "  is  4erefore  not  possible.  His  view  is  only  in  point  of 
fact  Thimasism  on  a  somewhat  higher  plane,  as  he  makes 


*  This  is  witli  Mr.  Roberts  another  of  those  "  inevitable  Actions  •  in 
which  he  so  largely  deals.  The  .spirits  of  men  are  with  him  not 
separate  entities,  but  only  ' '  inevitably  conr^ined  "  of  as  such.  "  Just  as 
there  \s  prirrutrilij  but  one  life,  the  self-existing  life  of  the  Eternal 

father,  an.l,  yet  we  talk  of  the  /iw/*  of  the  creatures  He  has  brought 
HJto  being  '• :'    Is  it  then  only  "  inevitably  conceive.l  "aliat  the  lives 
of  His  creatures  are  .separate  from   His  oWn  7     Are  they  not  actually 
:Sej>arate  oxistences  ?  ^ 

.  Again  he  says,  "  As  reasonable  would  it' be  for  Mr.  Grant  to  say  that 
because  we  have  heparate  '  fleshes/  therefore  it  is  not  one  common 
fleah  we  all  have."     Does  not  Mr.  B.  ''onfound  flesh  and  body  aome- 


what  ?  Eateyve  separate  "  fleshes  "  ?  The  argumeni  and  the  Engli»l. 
are  alike  new.  Separate  UdieH  we  have,  and  not  one  common  body. 
One  common  fiesh  we  liave,  and  therefore  not  separate  fleshes. 


)        / 


1     i 


I- 


THK  ftPIRIT  OP   MAK. 


47 


the  breath  of  life  and  the  Spirit  of  God  alMo  identical,  quot- 
ing the  very  Kaine  passages  lor  it  aa  we  have  already  con- 
sidered with  reference  to  Mr.  Roberts..  He  adduces  also 
Bishop  Ilorsley's  opinion,  that  no  one  "  who  compares  Gen. 
ii.  7  and  Eccl.  xii.  7,  can  doubt  that  the  'breath  of  life 
which  God  '  breathes  into  the  nostrils '  of  man  in  the  Book 
of  Genesis  is  the  very  same  thing  with  the  '  spirit  which  God 
gave '  in  the  Book  of  Kcclesiastes."  To  which  it  is  enough 
to  answer  that  we  doubt.  Neither  Horsley  nor  hiniself  give 
any  proof  of  {his  from  the  passages  in  question,  and  the  sub- 
ject will  come  Ui)  hereafter.  But  in  the  next  place  Mr. 
Constable  avails  himself  of  "  Hebrew  parallelism"  to  the 
eitent  that  Mr.  Roberts  does.  '  All  the  while  my 
breath  is  in  me,  and  the  Spirit  of  God  is  in  my  nostrils,"* 
he  thinks  conclusive.  It  may  be  doubtless  for  those  who 
know  no  personal  Spirit  of  God ;.  and  it  seems  as  if  Mr. 
Constable  had  got  aa  low  as  this.  The  answer  has  been 
already  given,  and  to  it  we  need  only  now  refer.^  Similarly 
Job  xxxiv.  14  has  been  considered;  but  how  he  can  quote 
'*  his  spirit  and  his  breath  "  to  show  that  the  two  are  one  is 
hard  to  understand.    The  contrary  would  seem  self-evident. 

Hebrew  parallelism  is  again  made  to  do  duty  in  interpret- 
ing Isaiah  xlii.  5,  Ivii.  10.  Mr.  Constable  would  have  it  that 
parallelism  consists  in  merely  using  synonymous  expressions 
in  the  "  parallel "  sentences.  This  is  a  false  and  unworthy 
conception  of  it,  which  would  reduce  it  to  mere  tautology. 
|t'  is  not  so,  as  every  verse  in  which  it  is  used  bears  witness. 
How  unworthy  a  repetition  would  it  be  to  make  Isaiah  say, 
as  Mr.  C.  would :  "  He  that  givoth  hrmtli  to  the  people 
upion  it,  and  breath  (spirit)  to  them  that  walk  therein."f 
Yet  these  are  proofs,  he  considers,  that  eslahUsh  the  identity 
of  the  breath  of  life  with  the  Spirit. 

Now  Scripture  speaks  of  the  spirit  of  man  being  not  only, 
as  we  have  seen,  ia  separate  entity  in  each  individual,  which 


7 


^Job  xxvii.  5. 

^I  reserve  the  quotation  of  Isaiah  Ivii.  10,  until  wo  come  to  consider 
the  word  found  thefe — neshamn.  '    . 


I 

-^  ■  ^- 

' .  " 

■T 

1 

'      ■    -  -'-WfiTq 

1       ;    •    ' 

* 

V 

j;  ■  . 

• 

« 
p 

« 

4 

- 

^^^BjKi  n 

' 

- 

' 

Bl 

^■11 J 

■*' 

» 

Bill'' 

ft 

■» 

if 

.     .-./ 

■    '     \  ■ 

„  ' 

/'  ,  .,'-';  ■ 

1 

1   i 

4                         ■          .     . 

*■ 

Iff-    '',.'■-. 

H':j; 

1« 

'\;  ■- 

■"     ■            -4 
/             ■                   - 

ifii'!  1 ' 

>t 

|k  .    ' 

■    ^ 

"           -.           ■     '                                                          '          ' 

*i 

IP'i' 

''■''■    ■■ 

n    ■ 

;  ' 

.■-■-.                                                            ■         ■' 

11 

'i 

; 

^ 

u 

m 

\ 

■.-.,%                                                 -♦          . 

mh'ii. 

':■      .     •*  ■                         .-  ■      ■. 

mm  Bl^uI'''  '    . 

'           1    ■   . 

V 

Ira  lffi<jl!B' 

Milil! 

■■  ' 

f                    '^i 

ijl.  ^' 

■    .  -                 '  '                              / 

jH'j-jjfij 

a 

* 

"i , '      , :     .    ■ '  ■ 

.\ 

«. 

,-    ■      ■  ■                                                                                   -..«'' 

• 

.    ll-    1 

« 

■      *                       . 

I 

■il 

r  ■ ,  ■ 

'  •.    ■ 

•■     .           ' 

■'  m 

1 

,:!!! 

■[■  ;         ;      '-..'; 

3T 

»  ■ 

■1  - 

■  i^'  I'i .                        . 

': 

■m  ■--::---   ■--       ■ 

^- -■' . 

'■.'■...■*             *■•  ■       - 

1 

•'.'.-'- 

''I'I'  ii 

*                  ■                                       •' 

ji 

1    ■ .  ■■ 

■■■■■ 

-r-~-r"--      f    ■■ 

._-        .__--*-„-,„... 

.--  ,.^ 

■'.—  -- 

-      -.- 

'.» 

■    *■  .'   ■ 

■  ■'          ■     •      '.    .            ■"     .  -                            •  ■'             ■                            -  '.  .      . 

, 

■''''.--     ■         ■                                   *  ■  ■ 

• 

.  "   .  •    ■  . 

-  ■   ."  ■   ■^■-     .".  '■■'■ 

•  ■  '■  .   ■■.■■■■  ,.  ^  ■•  V-  ■■   ■■''   -■   •  -■■      ■■■■' 

m 


M/y*  And,  moreover,  a  wrouji^ht  iron  gun,  except  under 
extrflordinnry  circumstances,  would  not  give  way  explo- 
sively, the  Btretching  of  th6  metal  giving  \yarning. 

It  is  possible,  however,  that  repecited  firing  might  alter 
the  formation  of  the  iron,  and  it  might  in  time  lose  its 
fibrous  construction.  Qases  of  wtowght  iron  railway 
bridges  have,becn  l^nown  where  the  coMinuous  jarring  of 
passing  trains  has  so  altered  the  for:n  of  Vl«o  iron. 

In  our  service  no  heavy  guns  are  entirely  made  of 
wrought  iron,  the  inner  tubes  being  made  of  toughened 
steel,  on  accoupt  of  the  comparative  softness  of  wrought  iron 
and  of  the  difficulty  of  forming  a  surface  free  from  flaws. 

At  first  we  used  it,  and  the  B.L.R.  guns  have  wrought 
iron  barrels.  We  still  use  it  in  the  palliser  converted  cast 
iron  guns,  in  order  to  giv€  sufficient  safety  to  guns  made  of  • 
such  weak  metal  as  cast  iron.  The  palliser  converted  gun 
isH  very  safe  gun  for  its  detachment,  for  before  the  inqer 
tube  of  wrought  iron  burst,  it  wqiild  stretch  to  such  an  ex- 
tent as  to  split  the  cast  iron  casing.  . 

Wrought  iron  does  capitally  fdr  the  exterior  portions  of 
guns,  as  it  is  not  only  cheap  but  easily  worked,  and  from  its 
ductility  gives  a  large  nmrgin  of  safety.  ' 

In  the  Royal  gun  factories  all  iron  used  is  carefully  test-  TcBting  Iron 
ed,  both  as  to  the  distance  to  whicli  it  will  draw  out  before 
breaking,  and  as  to  \\\q  weight  required  to  break  it;  for  the 
former  shews  its  ductility  and  the  latter  its  tenacity. y  Its 
fracture  is  also  examined.  A  good  tough  ws:Qugkt  iron 
ought  to  present  a  fracture  of  irregul^^r  silky  appearance,         • 

light  grey  in  colour,  and  of  well  defined  fibre.  ■  ' 

■  ^     /'  ■'-''■.'■ 

SJeel.  ■  /■   ' 

Steel  has,  till  lately,  been  defined  accordi^ig  to  its  sup- 
posed chemical  constitution  as  a  form  of  iron  containing  from 
3  to  2  per  cent:  of  carbon.      According  to  this  definition,  > 
when   the  carbon   is  present  in  certain  proportions—the        „ 
limits  of  which  cannot  be  strictly  defined — we  have  the 
various  kinds  of  steel,  which  are  highly  elastic,  malleable    - 


t 


ij . 


^■* 


48         FACTS   AND   THEORIF.S    AS   TO   A    FLTURE   STATE. 

the  breath  of  life  is  not,  but  (as  the  breath  c^f  life  clearly  is 
not)  a  th'mgfoi-mfjd  within  him  (Zech.  xli.  1)  :  "  The  burden 
of  the  word  of  the  Iwor<l  lor  Israel,  saith  the  Lord,  which 
stretcheth  forth  the  heavens,  and  layeth  the  foundation  of 
the  earth,  and  fonneth  (he  sph-if  of  via  it.  it^ith'ni  him.'' 
Thus,  along  with  the  formation  of  the  heavens  and  the  earth, 
as  Of  equal  importanee  with  these  (the  body  beuig  moreover 
passed  over  in  the  matter)  there  is  put  by  the  inspired 
writer  this  formation  o^  the  spin't  of  man.  And  this  is  the 
complete  upsetting  of  the  materialistic  theory.  The  spirit 
of  man  is  fonncf  within  him.  It  is  a  separate  entity  then 
in  each  individual  man.  not  (like  the  breath  of  life)  a  eonimon 
principle  shared  by  all.-' 

Moreover  the  possession  of  a  spirit  by  the  beast  is  not 
asserted  in  Scripture,  except  in  <ino  pa.ssage  by  the  writer 
of  Ecclesiastos  (ch.  iii.  ID-Jl):  •  For  that  wiiich  belalleth 
the  sons  of  men  bolhlletli  Ik'U'I-';  even  one  ihinii;  belalleth 
them;  as  theonc  dieth  so  dleth  tlie  oilier ;  y(?a,  llioy  have 
all  one  breath  (nvicJi) ;  so  tliat  a  man  hath  no  prerminence 
over  a  beast,  lor  all  is  vanif y.  All  no  uikto  one  place :  all 
are  of  the  dust,  and  all  turn  to  dust  ai::a;n.  \Vu<>  kntnreth 
the  spirit  of  man  that  goetb  upward,  mil  tlie  f<p'n''it  of  the 
beast  that  goeth  downward  to  the  earth  "r 

This  passage  has  been  seized  upon  by  niaterlalists  of 
course, and  is  constantly  put  forth  as  tlie  stronuiioM  of  their 
doctrine.  They  quote  verse*  10  triumpiiant*}-.  'Words 
cannot  be  stronger  than  thi?,*'  says  Mr.  Constable.     "The 

*  Roberta  admits' iiideofl  horo  "  n  cnnuiiori  spiill  (!'Atr;i'U''''l  a'-ctn-diiiii 
to  tlio  will  of  the  Creator,  ajid  t'»r/i'-'>  into  thf>  spirits  of  uif^ii."  Hut 
lie  has  rendt;ro,d  this  imposMhlo  in  iiis  view  of  tliin^'-;,  l>y  t«'lliiiz  "^ 
that  the  xery  fTixfrnrr  of  separate  spirit'^  is  n-ily  "  'r,)o\-Ur\\)]\'  rnnnirrr/," 
but  not  a,  real  thiii:^.  Does  he  mean  to  lell  us  iha!  <jiod '•  formed  "  the 
"  commou^spirit"  he  speak*;  of  into  the  "  :'K".;t,"': "  eoiiceptioji  "  of  :i 
distinct  thing  ? 

This  constant  use  of  lanc^nase  \vl)ich  is  merely  firtitions  marks  his 
argument  throusliout.  What  is  it  but  tlie  decepion  of  one  by  whom 
he  is  himself,  alas,  duped,  and  in  wliose  hands  he  is  the  unhappy  instru- 
ment in  deceirins  others  1  ' 


t 


« 


y 


t 


/  tuj:  siniilT  of  Man. 


49 


■  ■ 


9 


preacher  tells  us  not  only  that  man  and  beast  both  .have 
spirit,  but  that  the  spirit  of  both  is  one  and  tlie  jsame.  He 
is  here  evidontly  comparing  them  in  what  they  had  of  the 
highest  kind,  and  nothing  could  be  higher  than  the  posses- 
sion of  that  spirit  which  the  P^salms  and  other  Scriptures  tell 
us  was  indeed  nothing  less  than  the  Spirit  of  God  Himself. 
Yet  in  this  he  tells  us  that  '  man  hath  no  preeminence  above 
a  beast."'*  '■...'■ 

This  is  bold  enough  indeed :  Mr.  Constable  has  the  merit 
of  speaking  out  his  thoughts.  In  his  very  highest  attribute, 
it  seems  then,  man  has  xo  preeminence  above  a  beast. 
Mind,  conscience,  rcsponsibiiity,  moral  qualities,  either  he  has 
not,  ^r  the  beast  has,  or  else  these  are,  after  all,  inferior, 
^things,  "not  of  the  highest  kind."'  "Man  being  in  honor 
and  rnuhrst<noi;„ri  v>t^  is  like  the  beasts  that  perish,"  says 
thepKalmlst  Mr.  Constable  adds  that  he  has  ?/o  preemi- 
nence over  them  .nnyliow,  and  as°ibr  "beasts  that  perish," 
why,  one  and  all  perish  alike  •  when  the  breath  leaves  them 
they  but  lie  down  In  the  du-i,  being  alike  hvt  dust. 

The  argument  jjroves  too  much,  and  so  proves  nothing. 
If  Mr.  Const.-uile  had  but  weighed  the  verse  before,  which 
he  omits,  he  might  have  found' reason  to  question  his»con- 
clusion.  The  wh<.]e  passage  is  what,  Solomon  tells  us,  he 
''mid  in  /./.s-  hctri''  .at  a  certain  time  (ver.  18).  It  is  not 
divine  revelation,  ])nt  hum.-m  doubt:  the  questioning  of 
man's  mind  when  speculating  uj)on  the  mystery  of  existence: 
"  who  knoir,tl,  the  i^plrlt  of  man  "'  •.--  etc.  It  is  the  language  of 
a  man  wh)  had  '•  given  his  heart  to  search  out  bV  v.-isdom%on- 
cerning  all  things  that  are  <lone  under  heaven;'"  Avho  had 
".said  in  his  heart"  Mi.  ii.  1),  "  Go  to  now,  I"  will  prove  thee 
with  mirth,"  and  wb^  had  "  sought  in  his  heart  to  give  himself 
to  ^rhu;'  and  "to  lay  hold  on  jhlh/-  that  he  might  see  what 
was  that  good  -^  the  sons  of  men,  Avhich  they  should  do 
under  heaven  allThe  days  of  tlieir^Iifo  "  (ver.  3).*  Thi^  is  no 
SpiriWaught  man.     In  no  sueh  pa'th  docs  the'Spirit  of  God 


# 


1.0.        FACTS  AND^HEOBIES  AS  TO   A   FUTURE   STATE. 

lead ;  and  the  result  is  that,  searching  out  by  human  wisdom, 
the  grave  into  which  all  go  is  an  impenetrable  mystery :  men 
die  as  the  beast  dies,  they  have  one  breath,  one  niac\  they 
<ro  to  the  dust  alike ;  aa  to  what  is  beyond,  no  more  human 
knowledge  can  penetrate  it :  who  knoweth  the  r,nich  of  man 
that  goeth  upward,  or  the  ruach  of  the  beast  that  goeth 
downward  to  the  earth  ?    That  word,  ruach,  with  its  various 
meaning  of  breath  or  spirit,  suits  well  the  doubtful  ques- 
•  tionin'T  oC  the  passage.     But  this  is  the  uncertainty  of  mere 
human  knowled-e.     The  Spirit  of  God  could  not  doubt  or 
question.     It  is  by  the  Spirit,  surely,  that  we  are  given  this 
history  of  human  searching  after  wisdom  and  after  good; 
but  the  lesson  is,  that  6y  human  searching  he  could  attain 
neither  the  one  nor  the  other.     Listen  to  Solomon's  own  -  . 
exposition  of  this  as  he  comes  out  into  the  light :  "As  thou 
KXOWEST  NOT  what  is  the  way  of  the  spirit,  nor  how  the 
bones  do  grow  in  the  womb  of  her  that^  is  with  child,  even 
so  thou  knmoest  not  the  works  of  God  who  maketh  all" 
(ch.  xi.  5).     Biit  he  has  something  to  say  now  about  his 
former  thoughts :  for  he  says  finally  an.l  conclusively,  that^ 
the  fpirit  of  man  does  not  "  go  downward  to  the  earth  "  :W 
"  Then  shalt  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was,  but  the   , 
spirit  shall  return  to  God  who  gave  it.  ' 

The  objection  is  Raised  as  to  this  by  .Mr.  Roberts,  that  it 
ignores  the  fact  of  Solomon's  God-given  wisdom.  But  it  is 
just  the  point  of  Ecclesiastes  to  show  how  the  wisdom  of  the 
^wisest  failed  here,  as  in  the  book  of  Job  the  perfection  of 
human-  goodness.  The  perfect  man  has  to  own  his  vileness 
before  God,  and  the  wisest  men  the  incompetence  Of  mere 

human  wisdom. 

For  Solomon's  wisdom  was  self-evidently  of  that  kmd 
which  fitted  him  for  the  kingly  office  which  he  filled,  and 
for  which  he  sought  it  (2  Chron.  i.  9,  10).  It  is  compared 
with  that  of  other  kings,  and  with  the  wisdom  of  the  East, 
and  of  Egypt,  though  it  surpassed  all  these.  He  was  the 
naturalifit  of  his  day;  his  proverbs  a  storehouse  of  practical 


\ 


^.i 


k 


wisdom  for  the  path  on  earth.     But  ho;r8  not   the  sweet 


THE   SPIRIT  OF  MAJf. 


51 


^i 


psalmist  of  Israel,  and  his  numerous  songs  are  mostly  fbr- 
gotten.     The  Song  of  Songs  is  an  allegory,  and   he  was 
evidently  in  it  the  unconscious  singer  of  spiritual  things  of 
which  he  knew>„t  little.     Who  could  compare  hiih  with 
David  for  spiritual  insight  ?    And  who  but  mustWament  his 
.manifest  departure  from  the  path  m  which  his  father  walked  ' 
that  departure  which,  if  it  be  admitted  (as  it  must  be)  spite 
of  Solomon's  wisdom,  so  simply  accounts  for  the  book -of 
Ecclesil^tes  being  not  the  re.cord  of  a  path  in  which  the 
Spirit  of  God  LED,  however  much  He  might  make  the  one 
who  walked  there  the  preacher  of  the  vanity  of  a  world 
which  he  had  ransacked  in  vain  for  satisfa^n. 

Now,  beside  this  manifestly  excepti<«i||8age  in  Ecclesi- 
astes,  there  are  none  that  assent  or  impl^Wffeast's  possession 
of  a  spirit.     The  passages  quoted  from  elsewhere  by  Mr  * 
Constable  are  plainly  inadequate.     The  "  breath  of  life  "  in 
^   Gen.  vi.  17  is  not  the  spirit,  as  a  comparison  with  vii.  22  may 
show.     Nor  is  it  in  Psa.  civ.  29.     He  contends,  indeed,  that 
'  If  rUach  m  verse  29  is  translated  "  breatl<"  it  must  be  equally 
so  m  verse  30 :  "  Thou  sendest  forth  Thy  breath  (ruach)' 
they  are  created."    But  hero  the  "sending  forth"  necessi- 
tates  the   other  rendering.     Were   it  breath,  however,  in 
both  places,  how  would  it  prove   Mr.  Constables   point' 
God  forms  the  spirit  in  man  :  He  does  not  form  the  breath 
of  life  in  him.*  '  ' 

*  Gen.  vii.  22  (w,«ry. ),  quoted  by  Annihilationists  as  proving  "  spWt " 
to  belong  to  hnasts.  is  a  mere  mistake.  The  same  phrase  is  found  in- 
i  8am.  XXII.  :^6,  and  is  there  translated  "  The  blast  of  the  breath  "  where 
agam  it  is  referred  to  the  nostrils:  "the  blast  of  the  breath  of  his 
nostnls."  It  is  the  action,  of  the  breath  upon  the  nostrils,  so  strongly 
marked  mutates  of  excitement  and  fear,  which  is  .triltingly  referred  to 
in  the  pas.sage  in  Genesis  :  "  All  in  whose  nostrils  was  the  breathing  of  ' 
the  breath  of  life  .  .  .  died." 

As  for  Xumb.  xvi.  22,  it  refers,  from  the  context,  to  man  simply  as 
eg.  m  Matt.  xxiv.  22.  "Except  those  days  should  be  shortened  no  JUsh 
should  be  saved  " ;  (Gen.  vi.  12),  '•  All  flesh  had  corrupted  his  way  upon 
the  earth    ;  (Psa.  Ixv.  2).  "  Thou  that  hearest  prayer,  to  Thee  shall  all 


flesh  come,"  etc 


-4i^  . 

■  if  ■ ; 


yAfiTS^ANIV  THEORIKS    AS 


XO    A    FUTURE   STATE. 


52        , 

'        '\'         •«i,.,„nfidfii'ce  to  my  former  position 
Iretnrn,  then,  ^^'^^"f  ^"^^  ,;^n,,  „  principle.,  oflife 
d,at,sofar  from  the  sp  r.t  of  man_  l.c^„  a  Pr      P 

he,*  in- common  with  t^  >-.^,   ^^  ,pP-       ^^^    ^^.   ,,,      . 
as-serts  the  bcusfs  possess  on  oM.  ^  ^   ^^^^   .helsllencc  of 

,S:::;!!rSi;:irU-^;v^-^^        , 

spirit,  which  they  ''f  >:>  f  ,;™t«  J'o.Jse.few  Scripture    • 
^  ^"V  Tot-K^So.  t  e'piri.  in  man,  that  it  is  the 

xi.  1  will- not  Ijen"  to  enn            i           ,  ,■,,       ^nd  says .  ; 

finitely  of  the  spirit,  of  7'"''""'  "[J'„r  m.ticSns  of  the   ; 

^God  formed  it.  not  -^b-^-^^f  ^^,,  ,, 

.oul!    Bes,de  -h.ch, _ to^.h.s      .p      ^^^  ^.^^.^_^  j^_^^... 

him,-  the  apostl*-tm  I  •^""^^•'V  ,,.,„„.,  „f  ^  „,a„,  save  the 
ledge:  '^  ^"^1  man  l^owe  h     ^  ^''"^^^^^^^^^^^^^    ^.^    ;        ,,, 

i.dtio„s'.o.:.emot^ns-^o      ..s,,nU^..^^^  ^^^ 

,hings  of  aman^|na  V.  .     „,^,  „,,.,,„„  spirit,  and   ■ 

know  the  ihinasotTi^o/s.),  1   .  .     '.  .  . 

„    ..mineno,  -->'---;  ;lf,,,„i,,  „e  doct^e 
My  ohjet,  so  la  ,  h»^    "^  ^     ^„^„^„.  entity  in, 

■  "'  *^  S"^':™: t;:^  t  vT-t  nna  ..,e  relationship  of 
T'  >  to  the  ^"1  will  eome  up  more  na.urallyattfr  we 
te'cIaMl^ed  iH  .mi.ar  manner  the  Sorip„ire  doe.rme  of 
tho  Foulitself.  ,  •",■  •'  "- '  f  ' 

.   .  „or<m..4  in  Gen.  n-  .   tor     ^'^;«     .'     ."    ^  ;,  ,,rilv,  as  there  itn. 
o  s.„  xxii.  1«.  r,eterr«l  .o  "■  tho  1-   •  "  -;^    ^  •      ,„  ,„„„  ;„ 

piled, the  r.»..'A  '" '"t"' T'   'ill^t-       .tL"  t 'l,^.,fty  ....MvaMit 
either  senna  of  •  l>tenth  ';n     ywH.       "  ■  *       ^ 


■,^r  ^.;- ' 


on 
life 

rEK     /. 
arid    ,  V 
of 

the " 

* 

iure 

the 

ion? 

ech.   *  ' 
'dc'. 
says.  ' 
the 

< 

QOW-       • 

2  the 
the 

,'  the 
s  not 
,  and   "^ 

jtrine 
ity  iw 
iip  of 
er  we 
ine  of    ' 


IP  lep- 
is  the 
22  and 
ere  im- 
nacJi  in 
lUvakMii 


THf;  S6UL. 


53 


tdruack;  certiinly  never. of  i  higher  charai^ec.  '  The  ^nirit  of'tJod  is 
;^vern-*A«»^«A.  ^  It  is  rather  .he/'hreathinST-  inspIraSm'-2t  " 

1^.  Psa_.v...lo;  I-.XXX..33.    As^t^,„,njrt«.^p^s.iv.ofiisb.l^g 


a  breaching  creature.as  ir.  Dcut:  xx.  1(»;  Josh  x  "iaaAti  11  1 1^  1  ir  w 
"^o Ji!  '•  Tn  a  t     '  r       "J  '  ^^>'\nslated  ;%.i)arlj.,  and  pot   bv 

Should  bfe  "  brea.hin3  "  Or  "  breath  "  in  Gen.^vli.  2!^.  1  K-r^",^!^ 

.  Job  xxvi^4  ;  xxvH.  3  ;  xxxiv.  li  ;  rsa.  ii.  22;  x.:i.  ^    \^^fi:^'^ 

^^wZ^:  l-s^e  beside  ^th^e  in  |cn,tu,-cl,a:.d  th?^  s.eLs't^ 

^     T^^i^T^  here  ourgfer.ion,trar^|ates  ii  ..spirit."  .et  tbat  t  is  cx- 
presMveof  th^  rtciton/rs^ther  than  the-ftk/iynf  the  sni-t   wo  n,,,,!! 
m  the  passage  itself;  Prov.x^i/ 27.. ,.       ;  ■' .  -  '''^  "^'"^7°  ™ay  f « 


••A 


> 


■i^. 


Y 


■J- 


.^CHAPTER  Y. 

•         Tin:   HCiVh. 


■TnE- Hebrew  .  word-  for  -'soal-is    r:j  i^>^phcsh    'the 

^Sn,S«.nt  ono^sh  in  vi«w  of,  what  ha,  .'iroady  ,come  be    ■ 
fo^c,us   when  sno.a clncr  r.r  fU.  u.^>,i   .•  ..      -  .     ./    :      °  "^^ 


ivX      "r"^"  •■"-",  -'  ^  w^v  01,  Avnat  has  .-ilready  ,come  be- 
•  fo^c^us  when  speaking  of  the  Word  lot' spirit  i^  ihT  bo^. 


■'    •    r      7.  ,  '  •='  >vuiu   aor  &]>irit.  I5»    | hat  'l-ntb 

„  «J^<aA  Snrl  -,>«,o/;.  are,  cqualjy  «i,i,  .,,>„o/,  a„,l  "l,,,"] 

■    derived  frpm. words  which  .i^nifV.  ■.■  ,o,y;«„,;„,-     The''a2 

.dea  of  „,«*&..,  „rtA-.Vy  •enror,  iu.cUhom.    Even  Dr  Thoma' 

tel  s.»  that  ,„,phesh  i.s  fro«  Iho  verb  ,o  brea"h.  ahho^t 

^.ephesh,    he  says,   •  stniihes  crea<.,rc,  ,M,„  I'fr  ,o„]-  ,,, 
breath,„s-y>„„„,  from  , be  v,rb<-ia,roa.ho.-     -Toietum 
then  to.  the  philology  of-.o„r- subjeoM  rep>ari.  tha   C    - 
for  rfb'''  °r'^S"^.''^r''"^'='  whereby  the  l.aine^slm 


'J-. 
f  ■'  ■ 


■  .-.^til 


.*;■ 


!  ■ 


*.     s. 


en  in 


^u,.,ram..   , ■,.,,,„■.....//,,„.,,  „„,,,„,,,  ^;^„ij.^^  ,.^- 


U^- 


/ 


^-: 


'54  FACTS  XND  THEOBIES  AS  TO  A  FUTDEE  STATE.        - 

«i;o  breath  ».d  Bonl.-  One  would  think,  ffom  the  .dmitted 
derivation  of  the  word  from  the  verb  to  breathe,  that  the 
triy-.if  such  t.-.be,wou.d^be  ail  the  ^erway^ 
and  that  the  K-WW  meaning  would  be  "breath,  and  «o 
Weorsoui:  In  point  of  fact,  «/.toA  is  only  once  Bugges^d 
afbLth  in  the  ma;gi&  of  Job  ^  20  and  without  neees«^^ 
v.d  for  "life"  only  as  the  priWiple  or  source  of  Lfe-a 
™eJn"  easily  derived  from  the  soul  being  stnctly  that 
™X:f  life  \o  the  body.  So  that !'  soul"  (in  the  common 
.  :^eptation  of  the  word,  is  properly  the  pnmary  &r,p««r«^ 
meaning,  and  the  other  meanings  are  derived  from  .^ 

Dr.  Thomas,  on  the  other  hand,  ^t^-t'^-'-f^ '^' ^"' 
and  body  arc  one.    "Now  if  it  boasted,  what  do-thcScnp-   , 

^res  d/finc  a  living  soul  to  be  V-fl>e  answer  .s  a^bvmg 
natural,  or  animal  bpdy.'t    But  I  '^ft^^\?'?^'Z^, 
or  any  other  who  takes  the  position,  if  he  could  understand 
Lhln  expression  as  "everything  where,»^there  was  a 
ZVm',0-    You  find  in  Gen.  i.  8(.,  "'everythmgwir^"' 
h    e  !as-l  living  soul."    Now  if  the  -'f /'l^^^^^ 
it  cannot  be  the  body,  and  the  fact  that-  .t  ■«  ca  led  a. 
■  lirin""  soul   precludes  the   possibility  of  "^sUtmg  it 
.:    fc"°as  materialists  love  to  do.    A  "living J*"  ^would 
make  no  sense;{  a  "living  breath"  would  be  no  better 
Zl  the  passage  shuts  us  up  to  the  necessity  of  allowmg 
^at  some'hing'is  alive  ,.Hln..  .be  "  breathing- frame  •' wh.^ 
Dr.  Thomas  speaks  of,  so  that  the:soul  and  ,t  are  d.stmcV 

from  each  other.     •  .    .       *:««„♦;«„ 

Dr.  Thrimas  thinks  he  has  Scripture  for  h'^  ■'1«°"!.'=»  J"" 

of^oul  and  body.     Let  him  speak  for  himself  j2_r|Ung 


a  ''life  living."    "  We  oft^n  hear  the  expression.    We  .hou  Id  !•'«  *  ^'^^  • 
\,  ^rte  ' ;  'so,  in  the  passage,  under  conslUeration  >t  -uld  b^  cone^^ 
to  say. '  and  ^y  life  .hall  live  ■  "  Jhe  Soul.  p.    3).     Th.s  »  a  no  able 
,p..iLn  of  discernment  or  the-want  of^t.     If  I  can  talk  of     gmn„  a 


gift/' I  can  therefore  talk  of  a  gift  giving  ;  and  u  I  can  « 
fng  a  thought,  I  can  equally  speak  of  a  thought  thinking  ! 


peak  of  think- 


':^:% 


^W  SOUL. 


65 


aW.  Ae%  the  apostle  sayi,  'There  is-a  natural  body  and 
therfe  „a  spiritual  ^ody.W  But  he  does  not  content  him- 
self with ^.mply  declaring/ this  truth;  he  goes  further,  and 
proves  It  by  quoting  the  ^ords  of  Moses,  saying,  '  For  it  is 
i  written,  the  first  man  Adim  was  made  into  a  fiving  soul,' 
and  then  adds,  'the  last  Adam  into  a  spirit  giving  life.'  .  . 
,    Ihe  proof  of  the  apostle's  proposition,  that  there  is  a  natu- 
ral bod  v  as  distinct  from  a  spiritual  body  lies  in  the  testi- 
Piony  that  Adam  was  made  into  a7//;my  sou!,  showing  that 
he  considere^^  a  natural  or  animal  body  and  a  living  soul  as 
one  and  the  snm5^thing.  .  If  he  did  not,  then  there  was^no 
proof  m  the -quotation  of  what  he  had  affirmed."! 
.  Dr.  Thomas\had  hei^e  to  misquote  Scripture  in  Order  to 
get  bis  argument,  such  as  it  is  even  then.     The  apostle  does 
not  say  «  for,"  but  «  and."     He  is  not  proving  his  statement 
hj  the  passage  .produced.     Why  should  he  undertake   to 
prove   that  Adam  had  ^^.mttiml  hoiiy?    He  is  showing, 
rather,  how  the  difference  between , the  first  and  last  Adaml' 
these  heads  o'f  the  human  race,-  naturally  or  spiritually,  iljus- 
tratcs  the  diflference  betwpen  the  natural  and  the  spiritual 
states,  and  confirms  there  being  sucli  a  difference  between 
what  we  are  now  and  what  we  phall  be.     «  Paul  quotes  the 
declaration  of  Mosbs,"  says  Mrjloberts,  ''  to  prove  the  ex'- 
istence  of  the  natural  body"  !^his  writer  fias  told  us  that 
th^e^^ir^^  of  inan  is  very  ea^ilj  seen ;  now  he  wants  proof 
of  the  existence  bf  the  fto<7y/;>  ,  •  \ 

'  ^'  °^*^  *^^^  '^  ^Tv^'  **'  "*^^^  ^^"^  ^^^^'^ ^a^^'"  an<i 

*  1  Cor.  XV.  44."      '         t  Elpis  Israel;  p  ^8'    ' 

.  4  His  treatment  of  ^11  ihi^  in  "  Man  Mortal  V  needs  little  notice,  save  *  - 
to  Illustrate  the  hopeless  difficulty  df  his  ppsition.     He  invekes  Dr  T  's 
metonomy  to  account  for  Oen.  i.  80.  but  wisely  refrains  from  applying  ' 
It  to  the  case  „.  hand.    I  have  already  shown  that  no  meaning  given  by 

hem  to  ?oul  will  account  for  it :  living  bodf, living  creature.lWing  lif^, ; 
hvmg  breath-none  of  them  will  do  l^ere.  The  metonomy  cannot  sus-  ■ 
tarn  80  great  a  burden.  ■<         \ 


He  admits  that  there  may  be  "something  alive ^'  in  the  body  \ 


as  you 


may  call  the  red  heat  of  a  fire  "something  aUve  »  within  the  coal! 


m, 


':^-^: 


'.♦ 


!■ 


y 


56        FACTS  AND   TUKOUIEs'AS  TO   A    FUTURE   STATE.  ^ 

from  that  down  to  .very  crecpin.thing  «f;:^^]^;«!^.f^^     ' 
It  is  not  said  Iha^t  the  beast  has  a  sp.r^t;  it  is  .ajd  that  it  ha« 
^souL     So  much  •.,  that  alLtUelowcr  ann.^s  an^^caM^ 
*'  80ul«  "  just  as  mitch  as  men  arc.     Tlus  is  to  btvobserN  cd 
J^^s  i  itsolf  an  anssvc-  vo  the  materialisUc  theones^l  ^ 
on^anlzation  ol"  the  most  cpmpletc  Idud.     It  outs  off  at  o^ce 
Zn::^  -.umonts  as  t.  the  iacultios  of  the  brutes,^ 
display  of  .machmcnt,  etc.,  which   men   oround   so  much 
4^.    Scripture  loads.us  t6  account  for  those,  not  by  reason 
onheir  or^ni^ation.  but  then-  ^^o.session  of  a  M^.ng  soul 
as   even   In  man,  ^vhiie  it   reiVu's  the  un-lorstand.n^  o.   ad 
human  things  (I  Cor.  ii.  11 )  to  the  spirit  vM  -'';t;-^!^;^ 
^nssr..s^m  sensual  fhcultlo.,-  appetites,  nay,  h.s  ahections^ 
4c.,are  ascMlbed  to  the  "  living  sour-a  sc,«l  so  tot 
from  the  life  of  the  body,  that  they  that  -  kdl  the  body    .. 
r^>*y/o'  ••  kill  th('>onr'  iM;Ut.  X.  ll^). 

'  Mr    Constable  will  peroeive,  therefore,  that  we"  a.^  oik-^  • 
with  him  as  to  the  hcA  that  man  ^nd  beast  are  abke  xio.- 
Bessed  of  living  -^onl^  We  dc»  not  di^ulse  the  truth  as    o 
this,  but   contend  ibr  It.     When  he  P'^oceeds  irom  tins  to 
infer  that  "the  simple  and  piaper- meaning  ot,the  lleD.cw    . 
word  u.pM^  when  q^plUd  f.  the  lower  creatures,  iS  /j^- 
p^nnal  tlr^nho  goes  beyond  the  record.    Cien.  i.  rIO  apphes. 
expressly  to   the    lower   creatures,  and    how  ean^^we  sa> 
»' cvervtiiln'r  wliereln  there    is  a  livmg   ///;     /      i»e  oni\ 
other  meai^lng  he  ascribes  to  it,  when  uppiW-d  to  man,  .^ 
"person  "-(p.  '^)^  !i"<^  'Avherein  tliere  is  a  hviog  person 
,  will  scarcely  do  either.'  ___         "  __.__  —  —,- 

This  i.  l,;<"i.v  vitatrt/fiCion."  of  courso  naain.  ami  it  doo«.  iurl.o.b. 

-^      To  all  his  bl,;d.rs  :.  u>  nn:  ,n.an;n..  I  ...uM  ,...-,•  n.vf oa,l.rs  to  tnv 
'   „ook  itself  tV,  a  reply.     Mr.  R  nft..,.  ......  f.  I.v.  wvU...  h.  co,n- 

ment«  beftfo  tie  W.S  tai,ly  pnss.s.,.!  ..r  tUe  n....un..-<>l  what  he  ^^„f.■. 

"^^iyr  a  vrrv  -n.od  a.-.^;,.:  tn^ni  .he  si.Io  nt  soiH.c  of  the  diflerence 
■   ~'  -        uM    rofor   to   Mivail's  "Lessons  from 


V 


I 


betw'een    nifUi   and   l>vu''\  I  v.' 
Nalu.-o."  c];ap.  vii._   (A[>plel«n  &  Co.) 
•f-riades,,i>.  .f4. 


< 

dis 
be 
wh 
bre 
hot 
<lra 
.  Scr 
saic 
life, 

1 

.  •  the 

<f   woi 

80    f 

•  not 
bod 
clc,^ 
But 

:\j 

.  bec£ 
forn 
nost 
Nov 
somi 
crea 
.man 
the  1 

meai 
brea 
iinto 

V 

Avhy 

••"•No 

pouit 

the  Si 


j^- 


V 


\  THE   SOUL.  '  ,  57 

■      *     A  '■ '   ■    '  '■  •  - 

Gen.  Goo4wyn  hus  still  another  detinitioa  :  "  The  soul,  as 
^  .       distinguished  from  the  mere  tody  or  soul-tabernacle,  niay 
;  V       be  considered  as  tluit  cornbination  oi' parts  df  the  inner  man, 
which  is  the  seat  of  the  mind  ahd  artec;tions,  and  having  the 
breath  of  life  gives   action  to,  the  outer  n^embers  of  the 
body,     W^ion  the  sjrlrlt,  |he  animating,  Principle,  is  with- 
drawn, the  man,  soul, and;  bodo,f,cwises  to  exist,  die,s."     His 
^'cripture  fV)r  thiij  seems  to  be  Gen.  il.  -T,/'  where  Adam  is 
:^  said  to  have  become  a  living  soul.    His  inner  organs  received 

life,  or  breath  of  e!ustcnct'aji?l.aetioni;*^       .V  '       ' 
Tims  Uic  .'y/^/^/- o/v/r/zM  of  the  bo(ty^f;eem  with  him  to  be 
.  '  the   soul,  the  outer  only,  the  toul-tabernade  or' body.     Ife" 
^   would  be  well  to  \ttempt  .■something  in  the;  way  of  proof  of 
so  startling  a  proposition  r.s  ihat,  the  Irmgs  aiid  other  parts 
•  not  defined  are  not  the  body  !     -  In  the  bo.ly,^'  "  oul  of  the 
^       body,"  '-absent  frbm  the  body, ^'  "putting  oil'  the  taberna- 
.        cle,  '  would  certainly 'have  a  new  signifieanee  in  this  way. 
'  But  I  think  it  scarc%  ncedWi  to  pursue  this  further. 

Ma«i  has,  then,  a  living  soul ;  nay,  he  /.v  one.     How'. he 
'  ,       became    so    Gen.  li.  7   informs  us :    ''And   the  Lord  -God 
formed  maii^f  the  dus^^■■the  ground,,  and  breathed  into  his 
nostrils  the  breath  of  iilb,  and  xnauOc cam-i  a  living  soill." 
'      Now,  upon  the  most  cureory  glance  at  this,  it  is  evident  that 
something  more  took  place  in  man's  /;reation  than  in'  the 
creation  of  the  brute.    .It  Is' plain  that  Go  T breathed' into 
man's  nostrils  the  breath  of  life,  an«;  ttiat  He  dwl  not  into 
the  brute's.     Roberts,  inde(#l,  conten.ls  that  Psa,  civ.  25-30 
supplies  what  is  omitteU  in  Genesis.     He  obtains  tKis  by 
means  of  the  old  confusion  bet wtvn  God's  Spirit  and  the 
,        breath  of  life.     Noi'  does  any  one,dViiy  {b«t  ''God  givetli  , 
up;o  all  Vife  and  breath  and  all' things.'"     Thequestion  is, 
why  was  the  gift  given  in  this  c^speeial  way  to  man  alone  ? 
-  "'No  matter,"  Kays  Mr.  K.,  •'  if  ■tjiey  all  ha\v  it."     But  the; 
pouit  is,  did  ijQd  come  in  in  this  special  way  to  give  merely 
^ ttie  same  gift  after  all  V    .The  llinguage  is'phenomenal,  as  Old 


*  Truth  and  Tradition,     v 


.  )  '• 


Il 


•fe 


58       FACTS  AND   THEORIES  is  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

,  Testament  language  largely  is,  and  that  makes  one  only  the  ^ 
more  to  ask,  is  this  breathing  of  God^not  a  form  of  expres-  • 
8ion  pointing  to  the   communication   of  somethmg  from  ^ 
Himself,  and  more  akin  to  Himself,  thw  is  impUed  in  water 
or  earth  simply  producing? 

Surely  it'is  so.  For  although  what  is  communicated  may 
not  be  yet  fully  shown-and  it  is  quite  the  character  of  an 
initial  revelation,  that  it  should  not'be-it  is  plain  that  man 
has  a//>/A  herewith  God  Himself  which  the  bea^asnot. 

And  this  is  not  by  a  higher  bodily  organization.  His 
body  has  been  before  perfected.  It  is  hu  the  way  he  receives 
life  Now,  if  the  breath  of  life  alone  were  commumcated 
(and  every  beast  has  it  as  much),  there  is  no  real  difference 
answerin«r  to  this  difference  of  communication:  the  phe- 
nomenal language  has  no  corresponding  meaning.^  But  thus 
it  is  that  man-only  dust  before-becomes  a  livmg  soul. 
And  that  purports  that  he  is  now  characterized,  as  we  have 
seen  before  inth^  beast,  by  something  now  living  withm  that 
man  who  was  \L  now  but  dust.  He  is  i,  living  soid ;  not 
by  the  comple/ion  x)f  his  bodily  organization,  but  by  the 
addition  of  a  new  constituent  of  being.  He  is  now  not  a 
mere  body,  nor  a  body  instinct  even  with  the  breath  ot  lile, 
he  is  ftm>»m  a  "  living  soul."*  '.  .    .     u- 

Still  why  is  man  called  a  living  soul,  a  title  which  is  his 
in  common  with  all  the  animate  creation,  rather  than  a 
"living  w//-iV,"  whiclj  woufd  distinguish  him  from  them. 
The  answer  would  seem  to  be  that  the  point  of  contrast  is 
not  with  the  lower  animals,  but  with  the  class  of  God  s 
creatures  to  which  as  a  monil  being  man  belongs.  The 
angels  are  spirit.^,  never  so„U.  The  distinction  between 
them  and  man,  -  made  a  little  lower  th^  the  angels^is^B 

Vnir  Morris-  gloss  l».at  u.plunh  rhnyah  means  a  "  rtflrorot/*  soal '' 
will  berepudiated  by  a..y  Scholar  In  a  secondary  sense  n^  ^hayah) 
is  used  for  revival  and  recovery,  but  its  simple  ordihafy  established 


is  "  living."    It  is  in  contrast  with  n*n  (/myaA).  "  to  be,    an 
the  being  of  a  stone,  for  instance,  is  distinct  from  the  life  of  an  apinwl- 


C 


If 


meaning 


THB  8QUL. 


6d 


t-  that  man  is  a  soul.  That  which  linka  him  with  the  inferior 
creatures,  is  that  which  distinguishes  him  from  pure  "  spirits," 
such  as  angels  are.* 

The  feet  here  manifest,  that  the  soul  is  thus  put  for  the 
whol6  man  himself,  as  what  characterizes  him,  or  gives  him 
his  place  among  God's  rational  creatures,  serves  to  explain 
g  many  passages  which  would  otherwise  present  difficulty. 
We  have  in  our  ordinary  language  similar  uses  of  the 
word  "  soul,"  which  certainly  have  not  grown  up  from  a 
materialistic  idea  of  it.  Thus  we  talk  of  "so  many  hohIs  on 
board  a  ship,"  -'every  soul  was  lost,"  and  ho  one  is  deceived 
by  it.  There  are,  however,  other  renderings  of  the  word 
nephesh,  and  other  uses  of  soul,  which  we  shall  look  at  in 
their  place.  As  usual,  the  deniers  <.f  the  Scripture  doctrine 
make  a  great  display  of  various  meanings  given  to  the  word." 
}5ays  Miles  Grant,t  '' N'ephe.sh,  the  word  rendered  soul,  is 
translated  in  forty-four  different  ways  in  the  common  English 
Bible.  We  now  propose  to  give  4iU  these  variations,  and 
il|uote  the  texts  4hat  contain  them."  .   .   = 

Now  I  would  say  that  nothing  is  more  common  than 
various  renderings  of  the  same  word  in  our  ordinary  trans- 
lation. Good  as  it  is,  and  in  most  cases  giving  the  sense 
with  sufficient  accuracy,  it  often  varies  from  literal  exact- 
ness.   With  all  this  variation  there  is  far  less  difference  than 

»  would  at  first  sight  appear.  Mr.  Grant  himself  reduces 
these  meanings  essentially  to  four, ''  creature,  person,  Kfe  and 
<lesir^"  "Soul,"  of  course,  disappears  out  of  this  catalogue, 
al^ough  it  is  the  translation  of  nepheah  475  times  out  of 
7^^  And  we  are,  therefore,  to  translate  Gen.  i.  30,  "every- 
thing that  creepeth  upon  the  earth  where//i  there  is  a  living 

♦  Because  he  has  this  in  common  with  t!ie  beasts,  Mr.  R-.  must  hot  ^ 
conclude  that  It  is  inferred  that  ra.in's  soul  is  just  what  the  beast's  is. 
If  "all  flesh  is  not  the  same  flesh"  even,  why  need  all  souls  be  the 
same? ^ ■    

And  if  God  speaks  of  His  "  soul,"  condescending  as  He  does  to  our 
familiar  human  speech,  He  is  never  caUed  a  soul  as  He  is  a  spirit. 
■  'u:.   ■}■  The  Soul,  what  is  it  1  p.  20.         ;__  __ 


f 


■■  I. 


'#' 


.i'.# 


00 


KAtns 


A^U  TUKOHIKH  Afi  TO  A  KUTUKE  HTATB. 


passages.  ^yj,,.„^.,.  „,i,v  llu- uiiKnisl.  of  his  soul. 

Wvxx'Vt   "oul"Mhoi>.opl.wusnu^ 
^"^   xMB    y'  shuU  lav  ui,  thus.  luy  wor.b  in  your  soul. 
?1;:L    xJ^:  ^  TI.  soUl  or  Jon.thuu  ..^mt  to  tUe  soul 

^^"""^Lo-  Tho  soul  of  all  tho  people  was  fSWa. 
"      2Sam"    B:  Th.  bU-llhat  uro  hat.d  oi  D.vi.l  .  soul 

'^ifn  :  What  ins  soal  a..in-th,  ev.-n  that  ho  doetb. 
•    Psa  "xm"2  :  How  hm^  Miall  I  tako  conns  Liu  .uy  scmiI. 

'cvi    in-  n..s.<nth'anm-sintothoirs.ml.  % 

■  evii   2G  :  Tlu-ir  soul  is  mclti-trht'Cimso  of  tronhh".^ 

..viv   MO-  Mvsoulbmikethforthclon-mi,'ithatii. 
i^a.  r^  -Ana  kr.ll  consum.  from  the  soul  oven  to  the  flesh, 
liii    11:  The  travail  ••I"  his  soul.  .       _ 

Mi.^  vi'  7  •  The  fn.it  .r  my  l.o.ly  for  tho  sin  of  my  soul. 
'      Xow   in  thosc^  exampios,  the  soul  is  aistinguishca  from 
bo^b;aynna  ilcsh.     It  long,  it  grieves,  it  hatev^t  loves. 

U  is  inaeea  :v  living  thing,  as  <'-•  '■  -l^-'^^.   ,^  .,,,^ 
Take,  again,  the  Xew  Testament  eqUivalmU  of  n.pfu^h 

^'![^*3,.og,  Fear  not  them^vhieh  kill  the  body  but  are  hot 
able  to  kill  the  soul. 

xi  29  :  y •'  «li'i^l  ft"'^  ^^'''^  ""^' '  '"^'^^  ^  ■       ' 

i^ii   is':  In  whom  my  sonl  is  w  11  pleased. 
'  xxvi.  38  :  My  soul  i-^ .  xccedin-  sorrowful.  ^— 

Euke  i.  4C  :  My  soul  doth  mu-nify  the  Lor^. 


"% 


John  xii 


27  :  Now  is  my  soul  troubled. 


^ 


ii 


%■ 


« 


m-. 


i 


^ 

i: 


f 


THK   SOUL. 

Acts  ii.  27  :  Thou  wiU  not  leav.-  my  hqxA  in  hell  (hati^.8): 
^J\&  ^^^^'^^^'^^S  th.!  souls  of  the  disciples.   . 


dl 


m- 


|l)Ic  would  it  1)0  to  translate  with  Mr.  Con- 
person  "  in  those)  passages ;  or  '*  body  "  or 
Tiiomas   and    his   follower  J  or    "inner 
lodwyn;   or  "creature,  pefin,  life  or  d^- 
i;ies(4rant|    Take,  lor  instance,  the  verA- first 
Jxample,  and  try  upon  it  any  or  all  of  these  various  rfider- 
«ng8.    LsMt  not  plain  that  not  one  of  i)ir,m  will  make  even  the 
smallest  fense  ?  -     . 

^  Mr.  Constable  has  indeed  done  his  best  to  defend  his 
position,  but  ho  owns  that  ho  takes  the  expression  in  its 
•' less  obviou.s  son.se.  "and  one  to  which  ho  is  compelled,  as 
he  thinks,  by  -  tlic.  general  doctrine  [of  Scripture]  upon  this 
sul^iect.  Iho  latter  as.^crtion  is  surely  incorrect,  and  a 
little  exammation  witr  show  ns  that  the  sense  ho  gives  it  is 
not  merely  the  "  less  obvious^  but  impossible. 

He  allows  that  if  soul|pl.c  lile, -«ian  can  and  does 

destroy     it.     But  he  argiioT^./^   Is  ^,  moa^,ntary   death: 

what  he  has  for  the  time  e.vtinguished  is  reserved  by  God  to 

shme  thron-h  all  eternity:  it  is  not  theretbre,  m  (iUseye 

or  m/W,  lost,  destroyed  or  j)orished."  >         '-.      ' 

VThis  will  not  answer,  however.     For  it  is  plain  that  the 

Lord  contrast,  killing  the  body  here  with  destruction  of 

body  and  .vo,./  in  hdl.     Xow  man  can  only  kill  even  the 

hojlj  for  a, m>i<ln:  he  cannot  pre  Vent  the  resurrection  even 

of  that.     What  he  can  do  as  to  the  ])od v  he  can  do  just  as 

much  (or  as  linle)  to  the  life,  and  therefore  there  would  be 

nrv  ground    lV.r  the  distinction  between  the  one   and  the 

other  which  the  pa.ssago  manifestly  makes^     The  Lord  says 

man^c^n  kill  the  body,  .oAthe  so.il.     Mr.  Constable  says  he 

can  kill  the  soul  (or  life)  also,  but  onlv  tor  awhile:   and 

that  ,s  equally  true  of  the  body.     According  to  Mr.  C  it 

should  hav^l.een '^Fear  not   thc^m  which  m  ndther  ho<ly 

njUfe:     Tins  is   not   a  '•  io.s  obvious,''  btit  In  ^poZ  . 
Die  sense.  ;  •  '^   > 


"^  •■■■ 


But 


again,  how  *^«»il?  "neji-^h  talk  of"  kiHine  the /r/i '»f 


■/. 


ft.,';- 


'•S>.»i 


Tf**- 


/• 


V 


II 


•       ^ 


r 


-/• 


I 


\  ■ ' 


no 


i..i^: 


w. 


Shapindf 
trunnions. 


120 

"  Every  larje  forging  is  nmdejn  the  saracj  way,  viz. :  Solid  forging. 

"Slabs"  of  iron  are  suoccsaively  welded  together  upon       gj  ,^ 
the  end  of  a  "  porter  bar,"  or  carrying  b«|r,  which  -acts  as  *"**.' 

a  lever  and  tongs  In  .manipulating  the  wX  " 

Slabs  are  formed  by  hammering  togeth^  several  blooxs 
of  scrap  iron.  , 

To/arm  a  trunnion  rii^,  the  porter  bar  ^  heated,  and    Trunnion 
slabs  are  welded  on  it,  tVo  at  a  time,  till  a  mW  of  the  re-        ''"*• 
quired  size  is  formed.  .      .    , 

This^s  roughly  hammered  int^  shape,  tric\  porter  bar 
_  being  in  the  continuation  of  qno  of  the*  trunniW.     This 
bfock  is  6onverted  into  a  ring  V.y  punching  a  lible  in  tW 
centre  (in  the  case  of  l^rge  guns,  two  holes.)     These  are' 
then. enlarged  by  drivjng  ovalshaped pandrels  through  it, 
increawng  in  sizfe  till  the  holeis  large  enough. 

The  trunnion  ring  has  to  be  heated  bets^een  each  punch- 
"^  iug,  and  the  trunnions  are  then  roughly  shaped*   r 

It  will  be  seen  that  in  tljis  case  the-  fibr^  will  Wn- along 
the  trunnions,  and  round  the  ring  as  described. 

Scrap  trom,  turnings  is  used,,  as  it  gives  a  good  fibrous 
iron  of  good  quality.  ;  'A 

When  we  want  a  solid  cylinder  of  iron,  cros||liP  binding 
sl^bs  should  be  welded  along  the  sides  of  thosWfirut  welded  \ 
^    to  (he  porter  bar,  as  in  the  cafee  x)f  the  fbr^ng  ft (r  a  large       - 
'  ■,  cjtecabel,        „-\  ^/\  '"  '^'-  ':    ■  •  .  '■  ^  ^'V  j  "  ;'■  ,  ■''^.  ^      ''.■'-.,.  '^" 

THe  heavy  bars  for  the  breech  coil8k)f  h^av /guns  are     Bars  for 
made  by  welding  successive  slabs  to  the  end  of  tlio  porter  heavy  coils, 
bar'till  sufficient  length  is  obtained.     9y  this  mean^  we  get 
a  denser  and  stronger  toaterial .  for  the  breedh  coil,  where  • 

great  strength  is  required.  \ 

When  an  inner  barrel  is  required,  several  eoUa  i^x^t  be 
welded  together.  -  >         /       .• 

The  B  tube,  or  chase,  of  heavy  giins,  is  also  composed  of 
tw6  united  coils,  as  well  as  the  breech  coil,  in  8o6ie  cases. 

To  begin  with,  the  coils  are  turned  smootli/at  ends,  and 
reciprocally  recessed,  that,  is,  a  iprojection  is  formed  on  one 
aad  a  corresponding  recess  is  formed  on  the  end  of  the  other. 


Forcing 
a  cascable. 


Uniting'two 
coils. 


Si: 


it'': 


fV 


5 

1 


'  -i. 


:r- 


62  FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE- 

much  more  of  "  killing  the  body  and  the  life  "  V  What  is 
killing  the  body  but  destroying  its  Ufef  I  must  plead 
ignoiioce  as  to  kilUng  the  body  and  the  life  being  different 

things  at aU.  Nay,  further,  since  "killing"   is   already 

"taking  life,"  I  niust  confess  I  faU  to  see  how  you  can  talk 
of  takiW  the  life  t>/ life  or  "  killing  /(/€." 

Thus,  then,  without  the  need  of  considering  the  passages 
with  which  he  has  sought  to  prop  up  his  argument  (passages 
which  will  be  examined,  however,  in  another  place),  we  may 
safely  assure  ourselves  that  the  Lord  speaks  of  a  true  soul 
in  man' which  man  cannot  kill  even  for  a  moment.  .They 
can,  for  a  moment,  the  body,  but  God  will. raise  it  up.  Not 
eoeii  for  a  moment  can  they  kill  the  soul.  . 

The  dilemma  has  been  attempted  to  be  avoided  in  another 
way:  Says  Miles  Grant:  "We  think  it  does  not  mean 
this  present  soul  or  .life,  for  the  reason  that  the  destruction 
threatened  is  not  in  this  life,  but  in  the  world  to  come. 
Man  can  and  does  take  this  life."  ^^ 

Therefore- "  soul "  has  to  be  rendered  the  "  life  to  come. 
But  this  it  never  means  :  the  life  to  come,  or  life  eternal,  is 
^oe,  never  p.meh^:    So  much  so  that  Good wyn  says  :  '•  W  her- 
ever  the  word  'psuche  is  found  it  is  in  direct  contrast  with 
zoe,  and  used  to  express  the  natural  life  or  soul  capable  ol 
being  destroyed,  put  to  death,  or  perishing."    This  is,  ot 
course,  as  to  the  letter  part  of  it,  merely  his  own  view,  and 
in  flat  denial  of  the  passage'  before  us;  for  how,  it  it  be 
the  natural  life,  merely,  can  man,  who  kills  the  body,  not 
km  it  '■"    But  the  "  life  to  come  "  it  is  not.    J*surh^\  m  a  sec- 
ondary sense,  is  "  life,"  because  the  soul  /.s  (in  effect)  life  to 
the  body.    This  natural  life  man  does  and  can  take ;  so  that  • 
psuche  here  must  be  (spite  of.the  protest  of  materialism)  that 
which  lies  baci:  of  the  life  //..6//-ti^  veritable  soul,  which  is 
out  of  man's  reach  altogether. 

Roberts  attempts  an  argument,  however,' from  John  xu. 
•25 :  "  The  man  losing  his  life  in  this  world  for  Christ's  sake, 
it      When  y     When  the  Son  of  man  comes 


> 


SOUL  AND  SPIRIT. 


\ 


iti8»o»,aj«„<,Aeori:fetocome."    Now  the  Lora-B  words 

hateth  h.  l,fe  .„  th,s  ^<,rl<^bM  keep  it  unto  life  eternal." 
Ho_^  could  a.ma„  keep  hisVe  to  come  «,Uo  life  to  come ! 
It  «  h,s  present  life  he  in  some  way*  keeps,  not  mererfor 
ever  b„t  to  i,ye  eternal.  By  and  by  we  shall  look  „ore 
closely  mto  what  "life  eternal  "  is,  and  shall  then  find"  s 
no  mere  etemal.  existence,  bat  far  more.  His  human  life 
W.I1  enter  th.s  new  condition.     But  that  shows  the  di^ti nc' 

nelksT":,    '  '""''"''  *■■*'  '* ''  ""«  •"■■»»  ««>  the  Lord 
speaks  of  m  the  passage.   As  I  have  said.  Scripture  expresses 

-hose  two  things  by  different  terms:  it  i^  always  Sa'r 

never ;««/,./  and  Mr,  Roberts  cannot  deny  it  ' 

But  to  give  «p  here  is  to  give  up  all  as  to  the  soul's 

The  doctrme  they  denounce  finds  to  this  verse  as  literal  ex- 
pression  as  need  bo.     If  it  hn  Pl,f«„i„  o    •  /  '"-f™' «* 
Pi.»„„-  L      \,.  rlatonic,  Scripture  is  then 

Platonic ;  or  rather,  Plato  is  thus  fer  SCTiptnral 


V  -I 


CHAM-EB  VI. 

FUN-CT.ON.S    AN,.    KKLATtbSSHIPS   OP    SOUL   AKD    SPIRIT. 

,  With  these  facts  before  ns,  the  wayis  prepared  for  us  to 
see  a  new  and  beautiful  harmony  to  the  S^cripture  teacLg 
as  to  soul  and  spirit.  That  these  are  quite  diwinct  from  o"f 
another,  though  so  nearly  related,  the  word  of  God  bears 
abundant  witness.  "  Your  whole  spirit  and  soul  and^ody " 
and  piercing  even  to  the  dividing  asunder  of  soul  a^d 
spirit,    are  passages  sufficiently  plain.    But  the  ouestion 

th«  which  the  inspired  writings  furnish,  we  find  also  the 


*In  »nnt  way  will  b*  better  considered  further  on. 


a 


i  i] 


>,! 


jj. 


1,  i. 


ft* 


4 


% 


64  FACTS  \^1>  TllLORlE^  AS  TO  A  FUTURK  STATE. 

foUest  confirmation  of  the  foot  of  the  existence  of  these  two 
separate*  entities  in  the  compound  nature  ot  rnan. 
t  Spirit  and  soul  and  body/ which  I  have  taken  us  the  key 

to  the  discovery  oi  man's  nature,  t;ives  us,  I  beheve,  ver> 
dea^  the  on  J  of  relationship.  The  .oul  is  here  the  con- 
Z^l.  link  between  the  spirit  and  the  body  The  spmt  is 
The  higher  part.  Hence,  although  it  be  true  that  -  the  body 
^SK>ut  the  spirit  is  dead^'  (Ja.nes  ii.  26),yeMl-  ^P-t- 
never  looked  at  as  the  H/e  of  the  body.  Ihe  word  lor 
"life,"  as  we  have  se<,n,  is  psu,J.e  or  n.  ,/../>,  in  its  ^econdm-y 

or  (fcr/i^ec^  meaning.  .  m^'"'^-^'"'    ■         ,         i*:^^  >.„t 

Aud  to  soul  or  .l.irit,  not  mftely  the  n.o.al  M"-  '.»=''.  l""' 
.ISO  the  sense,  an,,  .ho  cnotional  a„.l  in.eUortua   iacult    s 
are  ascribed.     Strikin,.  .uct  ^ut.riaUsts  tl>e  4,«..  (to 
which  ».,;/  ascribe  cverythi5gf#n«t  so  nu.ch  as  once  men- 
tioned from  Genesis  to   Itevela.ion.     Xor  has  the  M," 
:;   h  contains  the  brain,  a'.Vy  nK-ma,   or   n,onil   .aenU^s 
scribed  to  it.     •'  Vi„io„s  of  the  head     are  "'-'l^-l   f  •'-. 
iv-'IO    etc.),  l-lainlv  l>ec.u.se    the  eyes    a.e   .n    it.     lil.t  no 
;i;.n.al  or  moral  qualities,  no  foculties  besi.le.  are  ever  attr- 

■  i  Mo'not'.say  this  as  .lo.btinK  ,he  result  of  "«'"  •'•«-=^™t";- 
Vthis  resnect.     Uut,  as  fully allowi,,,-  that  the  t.ram  iS.  he    . 
i^,me„t  of  the  intellect,  it  makes  only  ,  he  uurn-  str.k.ng  he 
Ivin^hich  the  Spirit  oftiod  ,oe.  back  „1  't';";;'- "->>  • 
„r,;apto  that  of  which  i.  ,-..  .K  rely  ihe  oraan     ^tdl   no  e  so, 
Sse  feelings  and  facui.ies  are  attributed  hgnra Uvely  to 
the  hea^,  the"  bell,,  the  bowe.s„the  kidt.eys  trems)    the 
WO„,b,and  the  flesh  in  ^-eneral.  but  never    ..  the  ^-f_^^ 
at' the  *i.uarks  of  Kobert^t  belbre  e,.ed,  and  see  how  th. 
■  .  S»r:e„ara,e  or  .eparabl^i^  Mr.  lU,!.....'  --,  -  '^ ."-  '''-J""-' 

fnril.er  appeal  to  1  Cl.roii.  xii.  .TJ.  J-U-xxxn.  8,and  1  .ov.  xx.x.  -„as 
,vr,nM  rr^ad  for  l.ims^lf  tb.-  text'-  in  .lucstion. 


(  » 


\. 


m- 


SOUL   AXD    SPIRIT.         .  '      §5 

Wisdom  Of  God  raels  the  insane  folly  of  wbuld-be  philoso 
phe.rs.  lie  Avho  forek^^w  all  these  self-sufficient  speculations 
has>^poured  contempt  upon  them  by  utter  silence;  while' 
oxcop|;,,  the  li-urative-  lan-uagc  alluded  to,  all  the  faculties 
of  man  are  attributed  to  what  their  science  of  course  ^annot 
detect,  the  unseen  sx)ul  or  spirit.  They  may  correct  the 
AVord  mdced,  and  t^ey  are  bold  enough  to  do  so,  by  their 
m8re  perfect  knowledge ;  but  there  stands  the  fa/3b,  let'them 
m^e^jit  how  they  can.  • 

But  moreover  in  proclaiming  these  attributes  or  functions 
of  tho^pint  and  the  soul,  there  is  no  looseness  of  langua^ 
much  less  confusion.     The  mental  faculties,  emotior^.kcn- 
sual  appetites,  etc,  are  ascribed  to  soul  or  to  spirit  with  the 
utmost  exactness  and  the  most  unvarying  harmony:     It  is 
to  this  point  that  I  would  call  i^ost  earnest  and  special  at- 
tention.    We  ^all  find  in  every  case  that  intelligence  and 
judgment   belong    to   the   spirit;    the   affections,   desires, 
appetite^,  etc.-^o  the  soul.     I  place  before  my  rek 
passages,  or  alt  the  varieties  of  them,  upon  whicht 
ment  may  be  fofm{||*  «  ; 

And  first,  with  regard  to  spirit  (rwac/i  or  2>/*ewm«) . 

^      Gen.  xli»  ST' :  (Pharaoh'i^,  spirit  was  troubled.  '- 

Judges  viii.  3  ^  Their  spirit  was  abated  towards  him.' '       f 
Psa.  cvi.  3:5  :  Tliey  provoked  his  .spirit,  so  that  he  spake  un«d- 

-  visedly.  f^    -  /  ^ 

Prov.  xiv.  29  :  'Ho  that  is  hasty  of  spirit  exalteth  folly. 
Isa  XXIX.  24  :  They  that  erred  in  spirit  shall  come  to  under- 
standing. 

Ezck.  i.  21  :  ^ho  spirit  of  the  Jiving  creature  w^  in  the  wheels 
Mark.viii.  12  :  He  sighed  deeply  in  Lis  ^pirit. 
Acts  xvii.  16  :  His  spirit  was  stirred  wthin'him. 
1  Cor  ii.  11  :  What  man  knowth  the  things  o.f  a  man,  savethe 
spirit  of  man  wJuch  is  in  hitn.  / 

.  Rendered  in  our  version,  "miqd'*^' :  "  ■  ^' . 
Prov.  xxix.  11  :  A  fool  uttereth  all  his  jnind           •      '  ^ 
Ezek.  xi.  5  :  I  know  the  things-  thjit^tome  into  your  mind 
XX.  32;  That--'-  '            ^'    •                        ^ 


.•y^r' 


which  com^^h  into  your  mind. 


Dan.  V.  20  :  His  min-l  linnlpncd  in  prhlo. 


$¥ 


I.- 


,  L 


111 


ill 


66 


FACTS   A>I)   THKOUIES   AS  TO  A  VVTlT&E   STATE. 


"Understanding"  :  Isa.  xi.  4. 
"  Couracjc"  :  Josh.  n.  11. 
Now  hcre'it  Avill  require  no  lengthened  examinatioix  to 
see  that  the  spirit  is  presented  in  Sbrij^ture  as  the  seat  of  the     - 
mind  or  undenstandbo/,' tin  we  have  just  seen  it  to  be  some- 
times even  translated.     The  passage  from  1  Cor.  n.  11,  is^ 
indeed  the  mbs%.j)ositiVe  assertion  of  it  that  can  well  be  ? 
"  What  man  knoweth  tiae  things'  of  a  man,  save  the  spirit  of      ; 
man  which  is  in  him?"     Here  the  spirit  of  man  in  the  man 
is  that  part  of  him  to  which  all   intelligence  is   referred. 
Hence  we  mav  know  what  to  thwk  of  the  knowledge  oi-^ 
honesty  displaved  in  su'ch  a  statement  as  the  following  from 
one  of  Miles  Grant's  writings:  -In  all  the  100  passages  m 
the  Old  and  the  JiS.V  in  the  New  ^Fe^tament,  where  these » 
words  occur,  we  do  not  find  one  that  teaches  that  when 
this  spirit  or  breath  is  in  ihan,  it  is  tjie  thinking,  accountable 
part,  or  that  it  ever  did  or  ever  will  think.     Why  is  the 
Bible  wholly  silent  on  thig  point  ?     Why  are  we  not  taught 
somewhere  that  the  ruach  or  pneumfb  is  the  real  man?'^' 
Mr.  Grant  of  course  .'idopts  the  usual  c(>nfusif)n  of  the  breath 
of  life  with  the  spirit  of  man,  and  I  do  not 'mean  1 5.  assert 
by  any  means,  that  the  breath  of  life   is  the  "  real   man.'' 

'  But  to  his  latter  question  Tdo  most  positiyely  and  distinctly 
answer  that  the  Bible  does  teach  that  the  .spirit  of  man  is- 
the  conscious  thinking  part,  and  tliat  his  not  seeing  it  is  only 
due  to  his  own  blindness,  not  to  its  not  being  there.'  "  It  says  . 
most  definitely  and  distinct ly,.lhat  the  "man"  which  knows 
the  "things  of  a  man"  is  '- the  .s;//?W/  of  man,  which  is  IN' v 
him."  There  is  no  escapi'  from  its  i)lain  speakin.g^  It 
speaks  so  plainly  i,ndeed  that  Mr.  Grant  has  se<,'n  it  best  to  '' 

.  ignore  its  testimonv  in  his  pami)hl<}t  just  referred  to  ;  Hnd  it 

''  is  hL^  silence  that  is  to  be  remarked,  and  not  the  silence  of 
the  Scrii>tures.  , 

This  ''si.irit  of   man,'    then,  cannot  be  with  Mr.  Grant 
either  an  *'  influence  "  or  ''  a  state  of  feeling,"  or  the  "  atmos- 

'    phere  or   breath  of  life."     tl    caimot  be  Mr.  Morris'   //>- 


-.i_ 


*  Spirit  ill  Mail.  pp.  •"!,  32 


^ 


f    \ 


.I'   - 


u 


w 


■^:  ' 


»~ 


■^■■ 


SOt'L  ANI>   SPlttlT. 


lan. 
K'tly 
in  is- 
only 
says  . 
lows 
?  IX 
It 
\t  to  • 
ml  it 
'M  of 


U 


«3P 


67 


«a^«ro  (or  obc.    all  uncoWvortod  men    ar|  born    idiots),  or 

motu..  and  cuno^ions-of  tho.soul."     NofitiK  simply  wLat 

.   the  words  dedarcva  c<^ns(.ious  intelligent  exJMenee  ^n  the 

1^2^;"'  mT  ^'^  "^"f  >'^  »'-  intelligence  of  Suman  things 
•    isdnc.    ^  "./'"^  man  knoAveth  the  things  of  a  man,  save  the 

si'iuiT  OK  mX.v  which  is  IN-  him  ?  "  ,  •  " 

y  Passages  which  also  identify,  the  spirit  as  the  seat  of  the 
mmd  or  understanding,  I  have  already  <iuoted.    It  needs  not 
wr"'"'  them  here,  except  to  show  how  other  nses  of  the 
wc^d  are  <l.n.^d  from  this  one.     Thus, .in  Joshua  ii.  li,and 
.  1,  It  IS  used  for  «  courage,"  tlK3  connection  of  which  with 
presenceoi,.;..r'  is  familiar  to  all.    Andin  Judgesvi^l 
^.s  used  tor  , ganger/'  which  is  again  the  judgment  of  the 
T      I  J     """  5^1«^^  "Pon  what  presents  itself  to  it  as  evil 
Another  usp  of  the  word,  which  also  we  hav^  in  English,  for 
hop..vaun.gten^^ 

spir  t,  a  sp.nt  of  pnde,^'  etc.,  seems  derived  from  the  fact 
of  the.spmt1>emg  m  man  the  higher  part,  andthe  ric^htful 
governor  of  the  n.an-^wha?,  in^Wt,  characterizes  him 

^ow  letus  gather,  in  a  simlla^ay,  some  passa-es  as  to 
the  s^ji^an.!  the  diflerenc.  will  l^t  once  ..p^re^ 

ihus  It  is  the  seat  of  the  affections  :   >         ,  ^  . .    * 

f  r\'''''?SiJ^'" '^^"l^^  »^e'^^  l^th  fo^^our  dau^l^ter 
^^|..Ak  xvnui^Tho  soul  c^^^tha^  w,3  kniff^to  tllT  ^^uj^f 

,«^;,Psa.  xlii.  l:'«opauti?thmy^l  after  theo^O^ 

Y^^\  ^  ■  ^  ^'"*^^'  ^y  '«oal  thirstcth  for  Thee.  > 
Ixxxiv.  2  :  My  soul  longeth  for  the  courts  of  the  J5 

^  -  cJT^  '  O  W  ""!  '"^''''"*'^  '"'  '^"  ^""Sing  it  hath. 
«^ant..i.  t  :  o  Iliou  Avlioni  my  soid  loveth 

V  ft^\?^'!:^^;  With  mi^soulhave  I  desired  fi.oe  in  the  night 
^ken.^:  A  swor^shon  pierce  through  thine  own  sou^  ' 

Hcb.  X.  38  :  My  soul  shall  have  no  pleasure  in  him. 
As  it  loves,  so  jt  iuibs: 


Lev. 


xxyi.  15 :  If 


your  soul 


2Sani.  V.  8:  The  blind 


XI.  8  :  :\ry  soul  loath 


/,. . 


'^Bj^ 


It 


compassionates : 


*r 


<)  • 


08        FACTS 


la  soitl 


Judges  X, 
^^Qb  MX.  ^  --^^f  °^ 


?[f>. 


"tJTUK^:  .BTATUi 


V  » ■"  Tl 


^v 


V  ^ 


'..,'» 


li 


tt#i  grieS^edfJrjiljfi  misery  v>f^^        , 

ieat  df;>8ts  :   ?  ^'      §  ^  [   ,%L  ^  ^'  \'}^ 
.  la  :>fut  liis  scwf  d^retK  m'*hat  ho  doelh. 
t^^Pid  wiekcd  boasteth  'of .'Jiis  soiil's  desire. 
t3i'f  Flfshly.  lusts  which  ^r  against  the  scfoljj^ 

ifetitesf.pven,  of  the  bo^ :  , ,  ' 

fak  cvli/'lS  :  Their  soul  jxbhoiTol;]^!  manner  of  meat. 
i#roW  xij;.  15  :  An  idle  soul  VarJl  s^r  hunger.  "    ,  , 

li  ,"^*''xxv.  25  :  As  cold  watersi  to>  t'^Mfty  soul. 

'    i  kxviLJ  :  The  full  soul  loatheth  ^\ioncycomb.     ^ 
■  iWaU  xxii.  8  :  His  soul  hath  al;»pdtit^j 

liain  f  ir:  MeattoreUovethe^souL   .•, 

L'^ke  xii.  to.:  Soifl .  .  take,thiue  caa^^t,  drink/and  be  merry. 

So  Its  derWe^a:  pjeahings  are :   '\    ' 

-  ■'    "^    F.ppI    vi.  7. 

xxxiv.  IG. 

'  :  JOB.  xuv.  1^,  iu»t-.  >"•  't  ^r' '^-      ,    ,  . 

■Mind?^  in 'the  sense  of  ^viU  orl.jontion,  not  of  the  under- 
standing :  1  Sam:  ii.  35,  2  Kings  ix:  ld#^  „     •  . 
':.  A   9li-ht  c:«imination   of  tho^en)i)assages   wHl   serve   to 
aemonstrate  the  truth  of  niy  fornk^r  assertion  as  to  the  soul  h 
lee  andfunctions.     U  is  hcfe  seen  plamly  as  the  Imk  bu- 

Len  the  spirit,.i,a  the,  body  :  ^m^t""^       f^^t 
,  of  thelatt6^:THe  sense  of  " nf|||  ofVen  given  19  it.n 

•;.Scrininre  is  plamly  a  meaning 
'  In  jHLls  thp  (llirerencc  be" 
inlHRiost  marked  way,  an 
maintained  everywhere  thro 
Still   objection  has- beoii 
Roberts  has  even  ventured  th 
trary,, «  spirit"  and  "  soul  '^^re' '    .,,,     ^ 
"    niostindrscriminatemaunor.'     "v  inst«i>cas  Vjko  ».  40  4-^^ 
^Mysoul  dbth  magnify  the  Lord,  ana  my  s|>.rit  hatb  rejmded 
•'  -     :        ..    put  lirw1o»>s  not  tell  us  how  this  shows 


from  this 
rit 


very  fact, 
nd  spirit  is  preserved 
ist  thdrough  c^jQHls^ncy' 
£the;Biblev^  .        ,'         '■  V 
this  statement.     Mr.  : 
lion  that,  oh  the  con* 
>jj||tQrchangeably  in  the 


%■ 


tis)f 


♦Y-*  ■ 


«t' 


God  my  Saviour. 


ray 

their  indiscriminate  us^. 
express  how  fiiUyitsloBj^in 


m 


nl  doth  magnify''  pay  well 
;{^UtisM;;  wWIe  '^^jnyspin(^' 


5*. 


r\ 


^ 


>>  ■» 


^,  mini 

SRSSW 


.r^     "^S^S^^^^^.jM^Jl^^^fJi^^', 


.# 


.1" 


m^ 


SOUL  AND   SPIRIT. 


M 


H' 


t"  ttffthe  1    "^  f"™  «:^a„dboth  heart  and  mmdthn. 
.      testify  the  complete    ,vay  I'n  which  the   knowledge  of  a 

pra.se     There  .s  so  l.ttle  opposition  here  to  the  view  aWe 
«wen  that  .t  alone  giv.,  fulness  and  definiteri^ss  to  whit 
Zn^o^'"''^    hand,  Wn.es  a  poor  and  „nn.eaning 
;  He  goes  on:- --E-;,--    ■■■•■■      -^  ,-■■•■_-  ■ 

"  But  the  fact  can  bu^hown  from  the  very  passages  which  Mr 
tent  ha,  qnoto,,  :  for  instance,  out  of  nine  .^.oteSTolhow  tw 

to  do  with  mnotton,  such  as  anger,  fcnr  "  cV  ««  a       * 

■  ebse  e.a.ni„.a.i„„  show,  tho„  To  t'oaX'.haTthc  sfirit,  f/a^S 
onndcrstaudmg.has  to  do  with  trouble,  anger.  i-rovC  Z 

II  ^s^L-         "     "    ^^"'  """"'  o"'?  to  do  'i«.  the  exercise 

« 

Ylt%^'  .ff  ""V''^''"'^'*"^^'"'"^?™''™'!  the  theory. 
H«   shows  at  by  mfrrj-ing  from  it  "two  survivin'.,  W»J 

Tnl^'Sw       ^^"''^■''•■'•'"'""''•'=^<^"^""'"^'-'    Spirit,  so.^ 
tSklMjr;    ?"",    "  ■""  """  "  P-»''nality,"  and  ccrtain- 

■  m*fiM     !    '"1      """""  """■  ^'"'-     ^'  J'^'t''  the  body 
_  clrojIS  for  flSo  tmie  be.ng,  out  of  this  tri-unity.     Spirit  and 

'  I!  sTk  ■       '"^'"  '**'*  ■*'■''  r""-  '^"'V'i-     In  life  or  in 

.  fclh  the  myst#,o«s  n^ks«rfe«.ection  are  preserved,  and 

f  (.n  Mr.  K.  _s-  wordih^  ^{  ,,),  the  spirit  is  the  thinker,  and 

the  sou    t^  ./W.,.^|ei,> -are  A   indop*8ent  of   each 

other,_to„  pers™,Utio.,,  ,,«„..  ^.j,,,^  knowledge  of  the 

spmt  becomes  tlJporUrfof.tte^o„l.  thS  aflW^s  of  I 
l*r!fiH1  ;r'r?°"?'*^^^°^i"*--  «fB-interkpe„dence      ' 
!*.eh  Mr.  R-Iays  hofif  of  .isaKiinst  the  view :_"  He  shhed 


■»   S^  f  ""fl-n^on  at  all.    The  Iang«.ge  does  no    mor^ 
»nfonnd  soul  and  spirit  than  it  ,loes  hod,,  and  spirit,  if 


V 


\ 


■\ 


70  FACTSAXnTlIKORIKSASTOAPt-rrRESTATi:. 

rlgiclly  (™a  u.,„utnrally)  cc^truc-.l.  But  it  ^vu«  n.enU,! 
troll    hat  i,ro.lu«..,l  .!,.■  rigl.,  His  xi""^  .l.sc.r.nng  th 

Lvon  Pharaoh's  spirit  «as  in  lilce  ...aimer  trouUoa.  ... 
h  s  e^  because  he  couia  „ot  i..ter,„-et  his  .  reau.  ..  U.so 
cases,  suppose  the  spi.-it  .as  ..,i,.,l,  ^vh.v  co„  .    -^^ 

alccrns  the  thiugsQ"  a  ,.,a„  is  ,igh..,  ..a...e.l  '-^^ ^ 
the  trouble.     The  so.,1  i.,  I'haraoh  s  case,  sm.l  a,.,!  bo  1)    n 
the  Lord-s,  .night  he  i..volve.l;  but  the  evpress,o..s  arc  per- 
fectly   ppr«p,-i:te,  a»,l  the  ,1is.i..c.i«..  between  soul  and  sp.r, 
^ll  thin,  'a  real  signi«ca.,oe,  which  for  n.ater.ahs.n  docs 

""so  I  t.vc  shown  ai,..ve  how  the  .pi.it  in  con.,ee.,a  w*,h 
..n„°cr  ■•  (as  in  Jn.lges  viii.  :i).  I'sa.  evi.  :!:i,  an,!  P'ov  x.v. 
.9  Irrreally  to  l.e  c'lassclNvith  .his,  asS!»evi.U..,t;  an,l  Acts 
vvii    C  is  nea.lv  relatcl  and  easily  h.leH.g.ble. 

mt  let  n.eask  Mr.  Kobens, /,.«  l,e  fo.u.V- hate,  love, 
iJta,,  et-..e."  i..  Sc.-ipn.,-e  xscril.ed  tothe  spi.-i.  V    It  .splan. 
"has  not   ..  we  sh'„..ld  hhve  hehrd  of  il.     Does  ...^    h.s 
Lk  the.,,  as  if  the  '•  ,l,o.,ry  ■  had  so,.,e  lo„..datlo.,  .„  fact . 
As  to  the  soul,  Mr.  R.  asserts  that  1  he  ,p.otat.<,..s-^ 

,  11.    ll,.,t  tl„-  '  soul •  ..!■  af-  liijlle  h:is  !H  inlnh  t..  ll., 

"showasa  whole,  that  tlu      s"in    .-     i      .\.       ,„,        ,,  ,;.)    , 

with  hi-her  actions  ot  the  mind  as  th,-  spirit :  tmu  1  -'■  >■  ;';  '- 

,  ■  Kviir  "  ■  in  all  these,  which  are  thef.i-st  three. inotat.o.s, 

■    r",  ;  w"",;?  ihal  a  1  h-es  .ft,.,-  divine  thfes,,a..d  therefore  that 

L p;'^,  d  ..owl!  I'e'  n..t  this  ,.oi..t  i» W''''«-v-;'-';: 

1';^,,  the  soul  he  without  ^'""^^'■^f^^':'!^:^    \^^^. 
U    'That  mv  sonl  knowktii   right  ^^i■ll  ,1  "»^     u.    i   , 
LXtisplea«a,,t  to  thy  so.-,/;  rr.-.v.  ..iv.  M.  .^o  shall  th,- 
fo,<,«-/«/./.- ..t  "--■»■''"»'  he  t"  thy  soul.',  ,  . 

That  is  Mr.-lfl^d,c.-fs  disproof  ..f  the  whole  a.-gun.en..- 
I.Usyto..owhereaga..h..isn.u.H-ean,^.^^^^^ 


and  that  the  \k'vv  i»  .|ucsti.)u  t.n 
of  iru'aiiiiig  to  thi-  texts. 

For,  iw  to  theiirst  three  «|U«.tati<)iis 


i 


]u)\v  imjJossihU'  woUld 


i 


SOUL  sANI>  SPIRIT. 


71 


I  !  ^  .fT-  ^  P"""-'""  my  """.''after  Thee,"  "my  „,w 
th.rsteth,  >  "  ,„y  ;„/«,,  ,o„geth."  Certainly  it  h;,  „e"er  been 
coniended  that  the  soul  has  not  to  do  wUh  divine  th^^ 

contra,,  ,t  „  the  importance  of  their  gettinj;  into  the 
heart,  and  not  being  in  the  mind  only,  tl.atl  TheJ^etto  he 
.ither  tevts  .„  obscure  to  Mr.  Kobcrts.  The  kno,v'edl  of 
w.dom,„,«,  be  thus  .sweet  to  the  soul,  in  order.top  S    If 

t-xpianation  ot   tlie  last  tWo  mmfofi^iSSu    o 

.....i,.„,..__  1  ,  :J  ^  quotatior«-    So  ^ye  can  well 


«1( 
.s 
O 


lotlgo  is  not 


..n.lerstan,!  h„^K  "t«ft  the  soul  be  Jritbont,, 

merely  superficial  and  .iowerless  bnV  ki>,  ,„, 

turned  against  himself.      '""'''' ""'^^^ff™  are  easily ' 

'  statern'r!^'  f'  ^"'\  '"'  "  S™^^'^'  i-^o-i-^'ent  with  his  own 

:"3:d  .!i.,t;  ^;i::rr*"'"  r'"'-^  >-'^" 

by  "body,  life  and  mi'    ■■',;::  t  :;:'""  T '•''•'> ' 

'/-.  .,„./,  he  idetitifie,  the:"sp"t"\  tiX":::;^  jt' 

beve,  H,dced,  it  is  inconsistint  with  lis  system    and  L 
«a.d  ..o,  but  th.ardo..s  not  alter  the  f-,,,  7^7?'  ""'*: ''*™ 
m.anilestcoutr,adictiontohi,bti;-        '"'  "'"'  '"^'^  ^"'^  '" 

..'.r^.;':';;":::!;!^  ?■;-—'  opposition,  .^t 


while  the  .spirit  is  i^scriptu;  ;,;fcr:,rtr""°";  T 

»ul  i.,.the  sea,#.me  i^eclions  ri 'h  '  or  ton.^f  V'"  1 
l^al.e,Ju*sts,  and  ev#<,f:tlA„„,.,iL  „.,!*'"■«•  "U""'-   * 


ii)petit^3of  (hebody.       1^ 


i?r 

■ 

P 

'  -  f 

1 

»-t 

1.    '     V 

1 

M'' 

§• 

'j; 

*»♦' 


«u 


]PACT8  AND  TH 


AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  iiTATE. 


#    CHAPTER  VIT. 


so  VI.      A.X  D     SELF, 


V* 


hi* 


J!^  We  may  now  proceed  srill  further  in  proof  of  the  distinct 
"   ^Wieanlng  and  hanncMUous  use  of  these  words  in  Scripture; 
'^  "-'Wjh  added  harptiony  discovered  being  o^Apurse  new  pi  ^  ' 
of  t,he  reality  of  man's  spiritual  being,  ar^oftlfc  coinple 
TSeriptui'al  recognition  of  the  fact.  -* 

W-e  have  seen  the  intimate  alliance  of  soul  and^ody,  the 
very  appetites  (as  we  speak)  oftlitj  body  being  ascribed  to, 
the   soulA   Thi%ii^l^cs   it  .lltt|c  wonder   thflit  "soul"   and 

'  "life"  eh^HM^be  I©  far  iden^fied  as  to  be  expressed  even  by 
*^*^  4feP^  W*^*^'  'H^liat/oroiind  have  we  from  Scripture, 
indee^or  speaking  of  any  ''vital  principle"  a})art  from  the 
g(ju(i?  bsecms  plain  that  there  4s  niTsuch  thing;  and  that 
"  life  ''^Sit  the  ptrj^dddh  vjSjine-  OqJ:/  loith  the  soul.  The 
sool- IS  Se  life  while  iiaU^fes  in  coipwtiofi  with  the  body. 
The  life  is -(so  to  sp^j^'ti^e  I'HEXOMKlfeCl.  soul.  It  is  no 
wo&dei*,  then,  ^fet-'''^^  ^^'"  in^*an"^S^  should  easily  in  Scrip- 
ture xm  into  c|Pln(^ei;,and  be^both  covered  by  the  same 
Greek^or  Hebriip' wond.        -  , 

Thife  they  do  so  is  seen  in  a  passage  which  Mr.  Constable 

*hafl  very  strangely  himself  brought  forward  to  show  the  in- 
fluence of  "  Platonism  "  in  moulding  the  common  translation 

^  of  our  "Bible.     He   would   have   tlu;  word' ;>s<<cA<:,  which 

'  stands  for  soul  and  life  in  Lulce  xii.  10-23,  uniformly  rendered 
"  iile '*  aH  through.     Tojhost  readers  this  wilbsurely  appear 
impossible  and  aKsilrd.     l4ncy  a  man  represented  as  apos^ 
trophizing  his 7//;^  thus  :  "././/^  thou  hast  much  goods,  etc., 

'  .  .  .take  thine  case,  eat,,  drink,  and- bp  merr/"!     Yet,  on 
the  other  hand,  who  can  avoid  the  conuccliou  with  the  moral 

.  of  Jthis  very  story, ''  Take  no  thought  for  your  life  "  ?  Instead, 
then,  of  manifesting  the  Platonisni  of  th*'  translators,  it  does 


>J^% 


JI-SW 


%} 


«OUL   AXD   SELF. 


78 


as  r  ltd  •„  at  tjlt  T    "'^'""'^■ '"  ""  P™-"'  '««*. 
(1  Cor.  xv  44,    ..P"""'     ''"''y  of  the  resurrection 

With  tho°pn.c.icai  «fe  whirt^v^  ii  rrr"*''  '''«•' 

WAV    '  Tir«  u  -^  ^  ^^  the  flesh  in  a  SDecml 

.word  in  Hebrew  for  either  •™J|o  t^^v^  V"'^  "■"'^ 
/'«-/,.  i.  ^sed  correspon  W|y^°, f:,'"*^  l'^^'"^ 
the  emphatic  I  or  he  "  \?:  T^JT^  ''  "^''  ^*  ''  """' 
of  a  peLn  is  but  the  pe^lrhHf  '''"^''"''■-  '"^  ^-'  " 

•^^:^:^^^^^!::::^:^^'  T  "°*  ■""-■■ ' 

"  sniilQ  "  ;,»  «  ,  mode  ot  speech,  we  speak  of 


^Prt 


again 


rw '■■'"""■'""■"''' ■■'•"■■-'""■s/"'"™, 


IS   iisod  but  mice  (Pro 


but   once.      Fo 
"  &««o«,"  Eccl.  Ji.  3. 


self" 


V.  xxiv.  8), 
lit.  "faces."    Methim 


we  find,  beside  nephesh,  only 


i 


--■^  p  • 


once 


74  FACTS  AND'THKOBIES  ASTO  A  FUTuUbSTATK.  V 

yet  we  do  heiiove  in  the  immortality  of  tlie  soul  in  spito  of 
that.  Som(;how  to  ns,  as  to  X\u<  writers  of  Scripture,  the 
man  who  dwells  in  this  "natural"  body,  is  prciminently  a 
"soul."  "Soul"  characterizes  him,  whiK'  in  the  ttesh  at 
least,  in  some  sense  beyond  spirit  or  body.  The  body  he 
possesses  is  a  soul  body ;  the  life  he  lives  a  soul-life;  the 
man  himself  is  a  "  living  spuhV    /^     " 

Can  we  explain  this  identification,  while  yet  the  body  is 
what  is  most  evident  to  the  senses,  and  the  spirit  the.highei- 
and  intellectual  part,  and  which  .really  separates  jiian, from 
the  beast  ?     I  believe  We  can  very  intelligibly  ^v^iplain  it. 

Fof,  as  to  the  body,  what  is  it  apart  from, that  which  ani- 
mates and  .connects  it  with  the  sc1}ij|!  ^r6iind,  nay,  which 
holds  even  together  its  very  component^^>arts  in  one  organic    . 
whole?     It  is  the  soid  witli  A\iuch' w^  have  i'>ra"ctically  to 
do;  our  intercourf^e  is  of  soul  with  soul;  when  the  soul  is   , 
gone,  tbe  body  is  but  t^he  relic  of  what  we  once  knew. 

And  even  a^  to  the' spirit,  its  connection  with  •theputer 
world  is  also  by  the  soul.  The  aperture  of  knowledge  is  by 
the  senses.  •  The  word  we  have  before  seen,  in  VCov.  xv.,  to 
'be  translated  "natural,"  is  twice  olsewhefe,  tr;uislated  "«Gn-  , 
sual"  (James  iii.  15,  Jude  10),  and  is  really  "  psycluc,"  from 
^Hche,  soul.  The  Moul  is.tlms  really  thi' V//:'  hx3re,  the  man 
hmself  as  part  of  this  creation.  ,  Soul/life,  self,  are  so  near 
akin  to  one  another  as  alniost  to  merge',  in  olio  ;  but  the  key 
to  ^e  liarmony  is  iii  no:  wise  the  inaterialist^c  conception, 
biit  the  reverse.  ;        >";-■'•  ^  .   ^ 

And  this  is  cohfirmed  in  a  remarkable  way  by„the  use  of^ 
Scripture^  which,  when -speaking  of  the  disejnlwdicd,  state,  ' 
Identifies  mm  ^fMAix/y>/r/^ rather  than  with  his  soul.  Not 
that  what  kills  the  Ibdy  kills  the  soul.  This,  as  we  haver 
seen,  the  Wordempliaticidly  dienfesi  Butlyet  if  the  present 
life  be  emi^hatically  the  soul-Ufe-^the  living  man  the  living 
soul— death  is  the  epd  of  this  |bnu  of  existence.    The  soiil. 


though  iiot  extinct  in  death,  may  wrellbe^^Huid,  according  to 
the  true  pl#se  in  %v%  xxiv.  17,  18,  to  be  «  smitten  "  by  it. 
And,  wWl^  dsath  the  "soul  departs'  from  tbe  body. 


^ 


SOUL  AND  HKLF. 


•S6    r 


P 


75 


■       tZ"'J;o  ''i'""  "m' ;•"""  "'  "-'-«<»  from  death 
comt,  mto      ,t  again  (1  Jv.ngs  xwi.  21),  man  in  tho  diiu 

en.b«,l.ecl  s.ato  .i,„ply  i,  constantly  and  co„.^i.ton  y  a  ^ir a 

not  a  soul  ,v,,l,  two  exception,  only  which  limitthi,  ta  a 

•     Tel^  ft  "r^  ".'  "'"'"   ""'y  '""■^  convincingly  "h! 
realty  of  the  ilwtinction  we  are  making.      -  >'''■'"'- 

The  two  evceptions  are  Acts  M.  »f  („hich  in  onl»  .!,„ 

quotat  on  of  ,.«a.  wi.  1..),  „n.I  Uev.  vi.9     Bo  ,   I    fhl 

evidently  refer  to  .leatl,  and  the  connection  with  the  body 

.  The  ,oul,  under  the  altar  arethe-'soul,  of  thL  that  We 

8la,n  for  the  word  of  Clod,"  ->mtte„ "  HonlTwWch   '^ 

hen  (or  hades)  no  less  „  connoclcd  with  the  tlouHit  of 
the  partner-body  from  which  it  had  been  sundetd  but 
wh.ch  .snot  al  owed  ,„  see  'corruption;'  in  thet^l'  . 

Ordinarily,  the  commpn  (a„auage  of  the  day,  whichleifa' 
oMeparted  .;,/„■,,  ^a  „f  ,;/„„„,,  („„,,,  ,Xi  the  t'on 
eqmvalent  ,.f  the  same  >™rd),  is  based  upon  the  oldS 
Senptural  ..sage,  ;  A  ««piri,,"  as  in  Acts  Liii.  »,  (T^^e  ' 
common  term  for  •  one  p:.s,ed  into  the  unseen  tate  The 
Phnnsees  confessed  their  belief  in  ."  spirits,"  caretll,  dl 

ri^,  >K    ,       ''"""''''''  """•='''*  "«^  "«n  Lord  a  '•■sph-it ". 
■t^fj'lrr'''  f'»>"»''l-i'  '■•■'"'  not- flesh  and 

a"    '«,l  -v         -^      .',''"  '"•"«'".<•""»   on  the  other  hand 

^•'leparfs  o  (,„d  il^u  gave  if  (Eecl.  xii.  7);'  and  the  I  ord 
commc.,ds  IF.s,„int  to  0„.  Ka.hcr  (I.uke.  x '■  ii.  46,,  S  opheL 
Jl  to  I,.m  who  I.,  the  l^ey.  .,f  dcnh  and  ha^es  (Ac.r™ 

Again,  the  5' finiritml  "hn.Jtrr.jsr"    -"         "•    '         ^         ' 

^cooft, -^t,he  two  oomhinofj'— '•  onnnof  inhjvrlt   *i;«  i-"^   i    • 
nf  r;r,.|." /I  ri,y        ^...  <,.mnof  jnncrit   fhf»  Icrno^flom 


ofGcKl°"n  n 


or.  XV.  ;)0) 


r 


'■  I 

r 

I 


^   We  are  ;.„fi,.ii,ati„g  here  what  may  seetn  r.Hh.rto  l,oh,„. 
toaluture  stage  of  our  i„,„.i,,,  i„„  i^- „„„„„,  , i'""- 


-^ 


i; 


*\' 


•M 


'W 


i  '  *, 


".-■j^  ■ 


■•'xw-^tw 


■» 


126 


.;-ip. 


ik'' 


Till)  A  tube  is  prepared  as  pre vionsly  described,  fi'om  a  Manufacture 
solid  ingot.     It  is  heated,  wlicn  turned  and  rougb  bored,  to  fenerallyof  a 
,tbe  proper  heat,  and  is  phmged  into  a  bath  ofrape  oil. 

Toughening  strengtljj^ns  the  steel  very  much,  but  it  warps    EfftiJ|8  of 
it  a  little,  and  frequently  cijuses  the  surface  to  crack,  so  it 
has  to  be  turned  and  bored  true  after  the  operation.    .  ,  .  ^ 

■':,.  The  B  tube' is  composed  of  t\vo  single  and  slightly  taper  The  B.  tube. 
coils,/\inited  as  before  described.     It  is  then  turned  ;  the        , 
inside  is  then  gauged  so  that  the  ste^Hiube  may  be  finished 
'  to  correct  size,  allowing    OOaTins.  at  muzzle,  and  '002  at 
'  otlrer  end,  for  shrinkage.  ^ 

It  is  ea8ier(to  turij  to  gauge  than  bore  to  gauge,  hence 
the  reason  th^Jnside  of  a  toil  is  carefully  measured.  '      . 

The  'coiled*  breech  piefce ^consists  of  two  united  coils.  OoUed breech 
The  breech  end  has  a  screw,  cut  for  the  cascable.         ^^ 

G  coil  consists  of  a  breech  coil,  trunmdw  ring  and  muzzle 
coil,  united  as  before  described. 

N.B. — Double  and  treble  coils  are  not  now  use^the  bars 
being  inade  of  much  Ji^rger' section.  '      ^p 

The  coiled^breech  piece  is  first  shruiyk  oh  to  the  A  tube. 
A  shoulder  is  furnjed  on  its^jpfiuzzle  end  to  receivd  a  similar 
recess,  cut  in  the  B  tuhJe,  whi^^s  then  slirUnfe-on. .      •  *   -  ^ 

The  cascable  is  now  screwed  in,  so  that  it|te|s  compressed 
by  the  C  cqII,  wfeich  is  novv  .shrunk  ofl  over  au,  and  the  gim 
is  ready  for  (1)  gas  escape  being  made,  engraving,  finishing 
bore  and  rifling.  Venting  and  (2)  sighting^  marking,  &c. 

The  gas  escapfe"  is  cut  through  the  threads  of  the  cascablfe. 

The. other  operations/^ cannot  be,  with  advantage,  de- 
scribed,* we  not  being  able  to  see  the  actual  operations. 

The  gun  is  supplied  with  two  tangent  sights,  "a  centre 
hind  sight  and  three  trunnion  sights.        ""        ;      '^ '  ' 

'    Larger  natures  of  ^uns  are  made  on  similar  principles, 

The  cast  patterns  of  the  IS  ton   and  larger  guns,  Ijave 

^  ^muzzle"  coil  shrunk  on  separate  from  the  jacket,  to  which 

it  is  not  welded,  and  it  becomes  the  1  B  coil. . 


piece. 
C  Coil. 

'I'M 


Putting 
together. 


'#. 


-Larger 
nato^eB.' 


t»? 


,1    •■- 


■1 

I- 


mi 


r. 


t:i 


<."'■■■■ 


1   -s: 


^n-. 


I' 


n 


■  S'    1 


I  !  I 


lit 


76 


FACTS  AND  THEOBIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


v       drder  that  we  might  have  a  full  view  of  the  Scripture  teaoh- 

.„\!^r,'  iDg  as  to  what  man  is.     There  is  surely  a  consiste|icy  in  all 

•      ,  thisu  which  is   the   consistency  of  truth    itself     We  shall 

.      pursue  this  further  in  .the  next  chapter.     In  the  meanwhile 

"^  we  may  take  uj>  the  objections  of  Mr.  Coilstable  to  that 

view  cJf  "  soul  "  which  we  have  been  maintaining  here. 

Thus  he  complains  of  the  various  translation  which  in  our 
common  version  is  given  to  the  word.  He  argues  that  the 
translators,  "despite  l-lielr  Platonic  views,  are  compelled  to 
X  give  *  animal  life,'  as  a  true  ami  proper  (jense  for  that  word, 

which  they  generally  tran^^Iutv' by  a  term  which  they  suppose 
to  mean  something  infinitely  higheir  in- meaning \than '  anipial 
life.'     Just  as  if  a  wordt-an  have  fur  ifi^'}>Mhiap.if  smue  two 
nijeanings  wholly  different  from'  each  6th4r  I '' '" ' 

J  Where  OUT  tr4ri$lators  have  givseji  this  rcridering  of  animal 
liiie  I  cannot  $nd.    Mr.  Constable's  object  in  intrddiici&r 
"  ablmal  "  in^o  it^  is  plain,  Jhowever.   '  It  is  to  let  t;is  know  thai 
»oxd-Vfe  (if  I  may  use  the  expres&'ion)  is  common  %»  the 
lower  animals  along  with  man.' and  to  let  us  iiifif  ^"^^^^tk 
can  be  no  higher^a  thlugin  u.s  than  in  the  •■  beast.*;  which,i^|f 
ish."    This  is  to  decide  the  question  of  tha,p„ours  immoilalT  . 
ity  by  sleight  of  hand.     I'ht-,  inference  in  rtot  a  Just  ohe.     Xity 
"  all  flesh,"  as  the  apostle  ;^gues,  "  is"  not  x]\y,sfhne  flesh."* 
,how  much  less  need  All  snol-<  i^e  the  sarne.V  ,  Why  n'ot'say  - 
of  all  ''^ife''€;Ven  as  much,  ('\cept  that  it^  fdlv  uotjNJl  fee  UM)*- 
transparent  ?    Therefore  ,  the  a<lditional  word/  dropped  m, 
the  responsibility  to  be  assumed  by  thc'  trajp.'^lato^s,  While  7     '' 
Mr- Coristable  i*;  its  author !      '         -       *         ^/    ".       '< -^V 

I  have   shown  al^io   that  •'  ioui  \    \^   really  the  prihiafy 
meaning  of  both  the- Greek  and  Hebre-w- words  in  Scripture,  , 
and  yet  how  closely  vonnocted  tife ^  s^^ro'odary  meaning  of 
"  life  "  is.     The  v^  ire  certainly  ii^^l^^^^  ''contradictory,*' 
.  however   little   it    is   possible 'S, 
.Mr.  C  may^urge,  indeed,,  that 
after  tl^jBm,  vary  tjiie  translation 
escape  from  the  "difficulties  attefi 


y\ 


.0 


please,  ii*  Arder  to  ^ 
npon.'im  J[a,(pncsi),  eoi^- 
fitruction  eif>it.     Jle.does  adduce  Afatt.  ft;vi.  'in^ liO,  and  I-.uke 


'if 


,  *\      . 
«    ■  Sin 


B 


■4.. 


l- 

11     . 
11 

e 

,t      . 

r 
e 

I. 

0 

,1 

I 

%     : 

\ 

e 

I    '■ 

%.^ 

I 

"i   * 
7    • 


0 


o 


V'  ^    « 


e. 


««  «: 


f 


"■«> 


'■0\ 


SOUL  AND  SELF. 


'77 


■       _  -       •\i 

at  19-2S  M  eramples  where  psuche  ^stands  fof  life  a«d 
sonUnd  where  he  claims  it  |jmst  at  leifst  be  u'nifiirmlyjrM,. 


•    ,,  ® ,   7"'  ^'T^f'^y  =<*■>  that* s  to,*o latter  passag^itis 

clea  lyunpossjble     Did  any oiocveraddrpsssuchin  toper 

..     sonabtyas  h,s  "  life,"  and  bid  it  "take  ita'-easef' X?    T^ 

to  .8  the  rendering  Mr.  Constable  demands  r-  The  same 

^rformuy  of  rendering  won.d  i„  other  places  gi*  stiU  moTe 

^^'■^^'^^-^i'  '"'l  "'•  «'  ^--Jy  «>ticed„wher. 

;.:,     .w.pd      and  "spinfare   the   same   word.     The  rISle  S«. 
wonld  apply.is  in  short  not  without  many  an  e.ocptln  the!' 
e.oept.ons  being  determined  by  the  conation  '^ tuf  S 
word  .s  found.     In  JIatt.  xvi.o,,,  2a.Alfo?d  and  others  who 
a^e  mScently  orthodo.v,  render  the  last  verse  as  Mr'lcV 
would  do,  Without  the  Icaw  idea  of  i^s  being  «  forbidden  by 

L*inLut'    ^?''""^'^'-^>W-hich  the  parallel  pai! 
sage  in  Luke  ix.  2o  seems  evidently  to  show  to  be  the  true 
«n^,thpt  ■'  soul  "  is  here,  as  .,o,  often  in  the. Old  TestaLiT  ' 
tU  synonyn,  of .«//    "His  soul"  in  Hatt.  li  ool^ter 
■„  preted  by  the  passage  fn  Luke  to  be  "  himself  "The  te« 
of  ,h,s  world  or  the  next.     He  must  be  as  a  man  of  th^ 

'  Z  ;  ,     ,    ""'  *  '°^*' '— <•'- ;  >"*  1  do  not  see  how  it 
could  be  bettor  expre..sed  in  Engfish  than  It  is  in  the  way 

rendenng  of  p.suche  by  life  and  soul,  a  rondcrin.  whieh  w^uld 
bootjj,  madmissible,  if  i,  required  a^meani^g- for  theZ^d 
.wh.ch  ^-as  „ot  thoroughly.cstablished  eWh^re    ■  ' 

Mr^  ConstaWo  has  produced  some  pass-ages  to  show  that 

■  m  aTtlr  T     '  r-  ^''"'"^  '"  ^^y  ^'"^  anticipaUnt 

■   y*  ,^ 't", f ''J«'  has  been  already sonwwhat  l>etbre  us  it 

wiU  be  welljio  cansiderUonr  here'  '  ^  .-  ' 

'  Lef^flAg^'i'f  ''■',''  ''"""^•°''  "^^  "^^Ss  forward 

Himmar  ,o  which",i,„„d;  he  sa,:  :<h:  1^    1,^""™' 

With  tKp<o  T,.  •  •      T  .       ■•'  Hebrew  Scriptures. 

^With^he.e  hejom.  Joshnat«  dostnuMioM  of  "all  tho  souls" 


h 


* 


4 -I 


e:^;."". 


>>■ 


*. 


y- 


1 1 


,  / 


I; 


m 


. '  ■■«■•.■ 


fl^^^ 


I 


s  a 


\:-\. 


■«. 


78 


FACTS   AND'  THEORIES  AS  TO  A   FUTgKIv  STATE. 


-1^1 


in;  the  cities  of  Canaan  (!), and  the  phrases  **  my  soul  shall 
live  "  (Cren.  xii.  13),aDd  ^*let  iny  soul  die"  (Numb,  xxiii.  10)- 
Heiu^ges  also  Jol>'s  soul  choosing  death  (vii.  1.5),  and  Elihus 
.      words  (xxxiii.  22)  :  "his  soul  tlraweth  near  to  the  grave.'' 
'     Alsothfit  "in  the  H3rd  j^salm,  >vo  are  expressly  told  that  the 
souls  e\vn  of  Ciod's  perjiple  are   exposed  to  death  ;  mid   in 
another  psrl^Im  (Ixxviii.  50),  that  the  soul  is  not  '•  spared  from 
,  death  "  ^  "W'hile  t1\e  final  end  oi;  the  i^ipkeij  in  hell  .  .  .  .  is  de- 
"scribed  as  the  death  of  the  wnful  so.iil  (Ezek.  xviii,  *|()). 
I-    Again  as  to  the  ^Tew  Testament,  he  contends  that  Mark 
iii.  4  ^pnld  read,  '*t<)>  save  a  soul  or  to  kill  hf  and  tjo  Luke     , 
ix.  54r^6,  Acts  |;v.  2^),,Rom.\xi.  ;?.     He   urges  Rev.  xvi.  3, 
"jevery  living  soitl  died  in  the  sea;  ""  ami  adds,  |*  Once  more    >* 
Johff  telU  us  that  aliijSouls,  -vvhether  of  ihc  right erms  or. tl\iv^ 
p  wicked,  jyfter  death  <v>/////i«i'  irithotiflifc  \u\i\\  the  resurrec- 
tfbn.     In  Re\%x.v.  4,  fie  tells  us  that,  in  th«  |»rophetic  vision, 
of  the,  future  with  vvhieh  he  was  favored,  he  saw  ^  the  souls 
of  them  that  were  |yi^e^ded  "  in  aliKbi'i  HtaA .     He  goes  on 
•   in'verse  5  to  speak  i^.  nfhe'r  S',nl.-<.     Tie  tells  us.jthat  these 
litter  did  not  live  again  til)  after  a  certain.  j»eriod.     Hence 
we  gather  of  the  former  that  they  hnU   be+'u  ji^ist'M^to  life, 
"  i.'ei,  had  been  without  life,  iir  a  con<liMon  of  .TcSrLKtill  the 
resurrection."  iff 

Mr.  Constable's  qwh- canon    of  interpretatif»n  i,  is.  simple  .  • 
enough,* "that  the, word   psuchc  has  evidently,  wjieu  'Sj>oken 
of  as    a    cotistitiunt    part,  oi"  huiiian   nature,  o//<:  mi'ifartn 
'  m€(tnhi(f2^.    This,  he  si^'s,  is  'ilitj'.'"     So  that  jn  the,  last  quo- 
tatioii  theajMKtle  Juhniells  ijs,  "  I  saw  thc/Z/v-v  of  them  that  .^ 
were  beheaded.'' etc..  "  and  thev.'"  the  lives,  '•  li\'('d/'     He  saW    ■; 
.'  these  lives,  to  use  Mr,  C*  laniruage.  "  in  aliviuirstate,"     8o 
y    ih   Rev.^  xvi.  H.  '•  every' '^"'''"y  ^'J'f — tlw  ;word   'living!' '^ 
makes  thing.s  still  plainer,  Mr.  V.  thinks — "  died  in  the. .sea.'' 
So  Job  spoke  pf  his  life  choosing  tb-afti.  Kliliu  of  its  goiirg 
tqi  the  grave,  Abraham  o^i is  life  living,  and  BalajXin  of  its   ^". 
dying;  while  )ie  that  kille'i  tW^life  of  amanwasto  be  put,. 
•    to    death,  etc.     This^  is   all    ordinaj-y  and  «piite  intelligible,, 
^   TRn^lisH  :t'>^^lr.  C-onstable.  mimI    whi<h  (»ught.1o  i-ommeiu^^'; 


A  1 


%.' 


SOtJL   AX I>  SELF. 


-}'v"  ■ 

y 

*  ' 

-, 

^ 

** 

'  ■  '  ■  e 

'.       '      n        ■ 

A  1 


Its      ".^ 


79 


•^Howisittlwl.,1,.,  .loes  not  «ee  th.;,  impossibility  of  sa«h 
rendermg.,  «„.l  or,  tho  other  hand  ,l,a\  tWe  is  a  iLtim^ 

difflellt  f     •"?"        *"""■•     W.ysh«„Id  he  have   more 
^Mio:        '"    T"'  '"  ""■^^""'""linS  •fo.hua',  destroying, 
,      .all.the  s„„)s    ,„  Canaap,  6r  every  "hying  soul  "  dying  i| 

,   ,  ^esea,  «,an  ,f  it  had  ],eeA  a  newsppper  i:ragn.ph  L  tf: 
^h.pwreek.  a„d  •'  not  a  son)  saved  -  y    Wonid  this  mgget 
■:   to  h,„,,  a.,  sj^ilar- language  in  «oript„re  seems  to  do  how 
. .  ^ro„g_o„r  thoughts  arc  about  the  '■  salv«io„  "  of  "souls"  ? 

■■    "trte  a  „™7         "■  Tn        ""'*  '■°™'""''  t^'^'^tipn  into  : 

Mfve.a  soul  or  to  kill  Jt,".  actually  iutTOduein"  the  "it" 

..  J^-here  there  i,  none,  t*.hri„g  in  ,i,c  killing  of  a°so„Un    he 

,  most  sirikjpg  way  !vtV,,yi;s,,„,,d  not  b^  'l^ '"there  t 

. .  car,  only  argue  upoh^is.  pXip,c  of  unlfonnity"  of  meaning  " 

•The  'souls  of  yftsrHeheaded-.in  Rev.  ^^.  preseflfs 
b«t,htt  e.  mpre  ,r,ffiA,!ty;for  the  reviving  of  the  e  souir  s 
*-P<-e«M«f^a -resurreclii,;."  '  If«is  ,Serefo^ir»  i" 
stance  p^,!.^.u,e  ,f  ^„1  »f  a  „,anj-,r'tl,e  man  him,,.K  which 
I  havealrealfy.relerWa  to.  Tlfs^completes  the  list  of  New 
i^stamont.  passages.  .  ■  ^^  -^^^w 

r    The  fir.a  frotii  the.  04,1  testai^eiit   (Lev.  :«xiv.  17  1^)  T 
have  alre:^y  n.on-ea  tp.     The  ,exp.<;sion  here  an^ll 

where,  as  Gen.  x;.M.  21,  Dent.  xix.  CW,  xxii    26  Xe.^^ 

14,  is  invariahlv  ".v./////^/  the  sonf"  C 1  i         '  * 

>.  ™i         -,      ''""«/vi'»<^  f^oui,     aHd  we  have  seen  its 

force.    Tl,e  veWHs  nfct  ,h^  true  wor.l  for  killing,  nor  wouffl 
here lie  sense  in  speaking  of  killing  ,he  ///i^^ofT person  be 
■^:;^^'  ''V'-'f  —  ',.  ,*i„g  4r  and'Xg  tht 
l.fe  #^,tj.e  hfp  wouM  he  al,  i„suR>rabl,.  expression. 

It  18  scarcely. „ce<lful  again  .»„  spealc  of  /oshua  "Mv 
«oul  *all  livc.'Met  my  soul  ,1:,...'^^.  ,o  -lelive  Xir  s!Ll 
iron,  death,"  "Itc  sp,^ed  not  theh^^oul  fron.  death.'  "tri     . 


» 


-^ 


n-    4 . 


\  -  ■  ■■  -■  1 
\        I  ■ 


I         ^        -5- 


"JC 


80 


PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  STATE. 


!. 


I  i-' 


■'i  !    - 


aoul  that  sinneth,  it  shall  die,"  are  all  similar  expressions 
to  those  we  have  noticed  in  Revelation.*  Xor  does  Ezek. 
xviii,  27  speak  of  punishment  in  hell,  although  commonly 
taken  in  that  way,  but  of\Divine  government  in  the  world. 

Again,  Job's  soul  choonhy/  doatli  presents  no  difficulty : 
how  it  should  show  that  If  dies,  much  more  "becomes 'extinct, 
Mr.  Constable  shoukl  explain.  In  Job  x.xxili.  22,  were  the  . 
common  rendering  cr.iTeet,  the  vivid  poetry  would  soarcely 
require  so  narrow  an  interpretation.  Ti\xtshfti'hftth''M  ppt 
the  "grave  "  :  it  is  the"  pit,"  as  in  Vers.  18^  2^,  28^  30,t  th« 
abyss,  darker  and  itiorcd  read  than  the  grav'^. 

This  then  is  his  whole  argument.     At  the  Very  best  super- 
ficial, it  is  in  mlilin-  ciftse.s  inconsistent  and  _&elAdestrU'jtivc  in  ._ 
the  extreme.     His  IJ^Hure  is  not  Ironi  want  of  will  nor  of 
,^    mental  ability :  it  is  t^he  failure  of  el^rog  to  overthrow  truth, 
and,  thank  Go,4,  whatever  the  ddvocjite,  f?Ul  it  must. 


I 

i 


J L 


CHAKfER  VIII. 


ERE  reins 


TTu:   FAI 


There  renfiain  yet  8om,e  things  to  point  out  beforei  the 
harmony  of  Scripture  doctrine"  as  to  spirit  and  RQul-  is  prop- 
erly before  us.  Tvpes  indeed  of  the  dlfFcrencc  and  relation- 
ship between  these  two  essential  parts  of  man'-;  being  ai^e  to 
be  found,  I  doubt  not,  in  the  human  race  .at  Iar<>e.-  ]^tan 
and  woman,  in  their  characteristic',  differfendes,  ^»em  to 
pre^nt'very  much  the  peculiar  fi'.aturcs  pf  spirit'  and  soul ; 
the  one  predominant  hi  mcntsl  artivlty,  the  other  in  emo- 
tional;  the  woman  formed /V  th<'  man,  and  each  the  ^eoin,- 
-  .,  .  ^  ■  ■  -  -     . .   '  _^, 

♦  Examples  will  bo  f.rni'l  withf  ul  oily  U.riu-ulty  in  t.he01<l  TcstaxnAit. 
8ef>  for  in-^tfinrp  L^r.  xi.  1;).  .Tosh,  xxili.  11,  Eslli.  iv.  1.1,'ix.  .'H/Jab  xYiii. 
4,  xxxii.  ::,  J>s;i.  f-v;  is,  Na..  v.  14,  xlvi.'  'ZJaY.  iii.  11.     ,.     - 

t  Oi-'"  corruptiort,'  (...<  li.v'-.-^s.arijV  of  the  body  in^foly  ;  but  ''  pit''  is 
ntore  oai^Ij  and  tfio  triy»  uuku)  ■  j,  )\ofo. 


I 


_i L 


:«f 


,     I    . 


•  ■  1 


THE  PAtL, 


81 


plemept  of  the  other,  made;    for  mutual  support  and  re- 
lationsliip, "  ' 

The  aaalo-y  Way  be  traced  further  than  this,  however, 
and  gro ws^  si^ificance  as  we  contemplate  It.  The  man  wa? 
seduced  thr&ujrh  thfe  woman,  his  judgment  not  astray,  but 
led  captive  bvhls  affection.^.  "  Adam  was  not  deceived;' 
says  the  apostlV  (1  Tim,  ifi.  14),  "  but  the  woman  being 
deceived  was  iiLthe  tr&nfegression."  "  The  serpent  be- 
(juiled  me,"  says  %?  ,woman.  "  The  woman  gave  me  of 
the  tree  "  (not  beguiled  me),  sayjj  Adam.  Thus,  as  the  man 
was  led  by  the  womaVand  fell  by  her,  so  was  he,  it  is  plain, 
led  by  the  affections  of|he  soid,  agd  with  the  soul  the  spirit 
fell."       «    ■ 


It  is  always  so.  W\x^\x\\i^  language  of  the  day,  though 
not  of  Scripture— the  head\s  seduced  by  the  heart.  "  How- 
can  yo -believe,';  asks  the  LoW  Himself,  '-.who  receive  honor 
one  of  another,  and  seek  nolMhe  honor  \^iifeh  eAeth  from 
God  only  ?  •'  Ami  again— "tlkt  they  all  might  be  damhed, 
which  believed  nat  the  truth,  iut "  [mark  the  reason]  «  had 
plefasure  in  unrighteousness "  !|2  Thess.  ii.  12).  And  so 
.again,  when  therje  is  real  ttmtn|to  God,  ''with  the  hecurt;^ 

not    the    head,"  « man     believlth     unto- Kighteousness" 
(Rom.  X.  10}.      .    V   '    .      ;  iJb    .  ;         '.'      ^ 

Thus,  though  the  spirit  be  ^%  WWli  astray  as  the  ^oul,  it  is 
thrmfjh  the  soul,  as.wfeli  a;^  \yifc|.it,  itns  sej^uced  andl"^ 


fa^en.     And  the  Avort|  of  ^GodjlinVts"  own  pCTfeet  andwiS 
derful  way,  ever  ^eeps^n  mijiid  tlio  Vistinction^    It  proclaii^ 
.the  iact  that  in-fallen  man  Iho  spir!|t  haa^5^eMecl  its  8i%re^ 
matjy  to  the  soul,  ^nd  that  tluvft«atA-ur'  ma^  is  ^' s^^swaf " 
or  soul-led  (^n^/«<>?)  (r^^QKJI.  14).\  Imthe  believer^  And" 

.  especially  in  thp  f  btoielcsH  stat<v  of%uclivthe;,,8|Jirlt  ag#iii : 
recovers  ij.  supremacy'  >' ^^pirlt  and  iiriul  and  l)Ody '' ^ 
again  in4he  dlvi,i^e,j()riln-.„.,  """'''  ';" ;  :''    '  -  ,•,  "."    '-  .;-';;:         r^y 

Xor  are  tlu-se  ^^''a^^'.  I'l^-i'^^  ><':>ntaiy,  expfei^sii^^ 
s(Wi|^  th1n<^  i^  ox|i^e^^se<T  li^various,ways  m  the  language  ^ 

.  Script  ure.     T  us  tjie  v^;//, ;^  tli^^^^^^^t  wal  siate,  is  ideh- 

•■ttfi0d^rwi>M,tO<f^th  tluV:|iOUl;    .T^lW 


W^\ 


82        FACTS  ANI>  THEORIES  AS  TO   A    FUTUftS^TATE. 


4"  4 


i*^ 


times  "  will  "  in  our  oommon  vorslon  (l*(i:i.  xx\  ij.  ]:i,  xli.  2, 

Ezek.  xvi.  27).  .  "  Let  hef  go  whither  she  mHI,"  is  (in  Beut, 

xxi.  14)  "  let  her  go  to  hf^yacmi:'     "  Aha,  s<)  AvoiiU  we  have 

it"  (Psa.  XXXV.  l^f)),  is  "ahjij  o/^'a>?/^/;'    A^nd  the^ ^xpres- 

,.    sioo,  "binding   tho  soul  Avilh  li^>l)on<],*'"/?  ^./  with  a  vow, 

•.    '  repeated  ten  timesin  Kumh.  xxx,,  shows,  how  intimately  a\  ill 

and  soul  aro  eonneeted  together.'   Thljl^ft  is  even  so  that 

"the  hfsf  o"f  thJ-llesl^  and  tho  li(,-^f  df*'*iln\vt'S,  and  the  pride 

•of  life"  eharaeterize  the  worhHfor  (iod,  and  man,  alas !  is 

but  the  creature  oflUshl  v  impt»l.s( — ''f^ficnsual,'  if  "  not  liaving 

4he  Spirit  '(Jude  V,^.    '''  y         -    ■    , 

On  the  other  hand,  that 'the  spirit  sh/iuld  hav«'  supremacy, 
and  so  give  the  will  ( F  say  not.  in  inde]>e««le?iee  of  tlie  soul, 
'  but  a-s  enlightening  and  guiding  it ),  i^  evident  i'nmi  the  chief,  '||' 
place.it  grts.  In<hid  the  old  nature  ha^  its  synonym  of 
"ilesli,''  front  the  opjiosltc^tendent-j-  of  bviij-jr  gnided  bythe 
soul,  whieh  is  A) nearly  eonneeted  wltl\  tlie  l)ody.  *  ■But  into 
tliis  it  is  not  niy  ]t!'o,\Inee  m)W  to  enter.  '         -. 

Still  I  would  jioint  out  how,  in  'p('rfe<t  aec<yr4:wice  with  all 

this,  as  thus  sin  is  In  a  s])e(*ial  senve  '■  thq  sin  of  the   soul" 

(Mic.  vi.  7),  so  alf^nemcnt  U  said  to  be  made,  in  the  same 

way,  "  for  the  soul.^'     Tlie  .expression  is  tijrec  limeH  found 

(Exod.  xxx.   15,  Lev.   wiJ.   1  ),•  Xumb.  \kxi.    Tn)).      Ami  I 

.    speak  of  it  to  sho\v  tlie  b},e.ssod'hann<tny  c/f  >eriptUFc  on 

this  as  ori..uyfry  other  point.     Moreowr.  as  /./■  the  sduI 

.atonement  is  n^t'ded,  so //y  it  atmiemewt  was  made,    ''' »t 

it  plea.se(r^the;Lo^a  to   bniij^e  him;  lie  hath  |)i^  kimfo 

grief j  wherf  thou  .'halt  ni;ike  his  soul  an  olFerifig  for  sin,  lie 

:  fchall  see^liis  seed,  lie j'hall  prolong  his  days,  and  rhopleasurt* - 

"    Pf  the  Lor<Pf^h^n  j)roh.i)er  in  his  han'd.     lie  shall  see  ^f'-tho 

A  tr^vailof  his  .soi//  and  b-  satisfied  "  (Tsa.  liii.  ID,  11). 

S6  complet^^_^so  uiuibrn^  js  the.  testimony  of  the  Word, 


man's    UiiLATlONSHIP   Xo  GOD. 


83 


.2, 
lye 

08- 
'VV, 

•ill 

ml 

do 

is 


'  CHAPTER  IX.-'  ;'      '.'  .'..-'' 

'         ;  MIAX'S    RHLATioNSUIP   TO   G06. 

-"[■'.      ■  '    ■'■  '  ■  ■  <. 

■  OXE  last  consideration  l.etbrc  wo  ^loso  this  Action.     It  is 
very  piam  that,  as  di.sting.iiHhod  from  the  boasts,  man  is  in 
•     >cMpture  rooo-nizo.l  jis  i„  a  pJjicif  of  relationship  with  God  • 
and  this  by  creatioii,  iK.t  riMleinptioo  merely.     A<lam  as  the 
■  ;>voTk  of  (JodH  1  in;^ouie   s^H  as*the  genojilo-y  Jn 

^fcirf^^  boars  uitru^,  'Hlii^- son  of-  (locL'^    The  ai>ostle  eon- 
hrmvit  by  <}uoti%irom  the  heathen   poet,  -  we  are  also 
:  :  Hia^ftspring  "t  <Acts  xvii.  U^).     Now,  although  sin  has  so 
^    far  destroyed  tF«.  meaning  oi^this  as  to  umke  it  an  nrmvailin- 
,^^pba.  to  the  Jips  <^v  ,^d  ungodly  meft,  ^t,  the  basi^ 

,o|.relatlowship.li^istSr^pit<v  .,«  those  "afid  otter 

^^rd8  assure  «R    And  ibis  is  a  relationship*  whiMi  Jlainlyno 
\  '^^«*:^'<^*>^*^^^'^^^^^     Ms  very  nature  denies  it;  aiid  thi^^^h  a 
■\  dfetinction  of  the  v^ry  gi^t^JitoHt,  iniportan(H/evidently^ 
■  ^     Man  is  fit^ef^iVraeqiwtnt:^^^     an,V int^-rcOiHrso  with  God^ 
and  in  tte  >^fe  binmttv  arid  in  this  I  triay  say  alone  a 
.     moral  a«id»ciaAmtable  being.     He  mav '^  n<.t' «n<iorstand  " 
and  so  he  may  b('<.ome  ^vrthe  beasts  tiiat  pedsh  but  he  is 
not^owe.     fc,Ms.t«ahitest  di-radtitiori  even  h^  is  a  witness 
^   o£  fei^  noblier  origiii,  |^,r  a  beast  eannot  <legrade  itself      \nd 
^wit^  ail  this  |>erflo,..  ^pHeity  t^r  oyU,  n^iy,  with  all'tlre  ac- 
'?  ?15^''' '   '^"^^  ^"^  ''''^^*^^'  '"I'inisolf  of  relation. 

. .  ^^'Luke^ii.  ^8  :  w^r^.it:^;^Hl^  tg  "Mecivm  son.,  d.,  Jim  "  th^^^• 
.  r.  nc>l  m  the  ori^mrU.  .  That ,  i-    n.u.t  ho  uncler.r<.„d  i^'plain  froHs 

.«-eli<iue3t.Km--  S.th  V  i.-ag  tK..:-:,^..^;.,.,..,-  Adam/ 'a>  [  J^^^^' 
tWhicIf  >fr.>I.i!fi'»  Would  fratisla'o  'fM;««.»    ;      /  -        -° 


] 


a^ 


i  'i 


l!<l> 


g4        FACTS    AND   TllEORIKS   AS   TO    A    FIJTUUK    STATE. 

ship  to  the  Infinite  and  Eternal,  which,  npite  of  himself, 
warns  him  of  his  responsibility,  and  links  him  by  his  hopes 
or  by  bis  fears,  or  both,  with  that  life  l,eyon(l  death,  m  which, 
notwithstanding  the  seemb.g  protest  of  all  his  senses,  he 
almost  nniversally  believes.  ,     •  ,   *v. 

In  thus  asserting  with  the  inspired  historian,  and  with  the 
apostle,  man's  <listinet   place   in  nature  as  a/-  son  of  God,' 
I  do  not  at  all  forget  the  Lords  words  to  those- who  made 
this  very  thing  their  plea.     When  they  had  pat  forth  their       . 
claim,  ''  We  be  nbt-bornof  loriiication  •  we  have  oiu;  Father » 
even  God,"  I  perfectly  remember   that   His  answer  is,  "  It 
God  were  vour  Father,  ye^would  love  ine.  .   .   ,  ye  arc  of 
your  father  the  devil  "(John  viii.  12,  14  ).-But  thi<  language 
is  in  no  wise  contradictory  of  the  other,  as  of  course  it  could 
not  be.     For  the  Lord  says  tlie  same  as  to  their  being  Abra-       -' 
ham's^children.  an.l  that  c-.'rtain!^  they  nxr.-  by  natural  gen- 
eration however  little  morally  such.     It  js  of  their  moral 
condition   then  He   is  speaking.     Tlu-  devii  was   not  their 
father  physically  of  course.     Tiic  Lords  words  tlieu  do  not 
touch  the  question  of  their  bcin-:  physi.-.illy  Cicxl's  offspring, 
as  the  apostle  asserts.  - 

Bat  we  are  not  only  said  to  bi-  the  offspring  of  God,  it  is 
precisely  pointed  out  that  He  is  the  FathcM-  /in  contrast  with  . 
the  flesh)  of  ou».7?«>//.s.  ••  Furthermore  we  have  bad  fathers 
of  our/e.sA,  who  corrected  u.s  and  we  gave  them  reverence  : 
shall  wo  not  much  rather  be-in  siiV.ieetion  to  the  Father  erf 
.sy>iW7.s,  and  live  •?"  (Heb,  xii. '•>.( 

Who  can  deny  with  any  appearance  oj  .>ucce.s:v  that  we 
have  here  the  development,  by  an  iuspired  writer,  of  what 
the  creation  of  man,  as  given  »u  Geu.  ii.,  irapiie^  ?  We  have 
RQen  the  bodily  frame  formed  of  the  dust  of  the  grc.imd,  and 
though  God  wrought  in  a  special  wiy  to  fashion  it,  as  He 
dicl  not  with  the  beast,  yet  He  does  not  claim  to  be  the 
"  Father  of  our  Jksh.  But  we  have  seen  also  that  man  be. 
came  a  "  livnng  sonl,'^  not  in  that  way,  nor  as  brought  forth  ^ 
of  the  earth  at  all,  buC by  the  inbreathing  oFGod,  into  hira. mm 
This  is  not  said   of   ih.- b.'.-tst :  :inil.  pben(*m' linl  .-us  the  lan-^ 


^ 


<( , 


/ 
J- 


7^ 


MAN'S  RELATIONSHIP   TO   CiOD. 


S5 


^ 


goage  is,  it  is  only  therefor^  the  more,  instead  of  the  less, 
significant.  .  If  Gb4  did  not- want  to  convey  to  us  an  idea 
of  what  would  be  literally  expressed  by  it,  He  must  have 
intended  to  conveiy  the  thought  of  some  corresponding  spir-  , 
ituai  reality. 

And  what  can  this  be,  but  that  the  spiritual  part  which" 
animates  and  controls  the  bodily  organism  is  something 
front  Himself  and  akin  to  Himself  in  a  way  that  the  body  is 
not?  , 

Here  then  the  apostle  develops  this  thoughi.  He. is  not 
the  Father,  though  the  Creator,  of  our  flesh.  It  is  not  the 
bare  fact  of  our  creaturehood  that  constitutes  urf  Hisj  chil- 
■vdren.  The  beasts  are  His  creatiuos  also,  but  are  not  this. 
He  is  the.  Father  of  «nii-  .^/.irifs,  not  our  llesh;  nay,  not  . 
merely  of  our  spirit^,  but  of  .^nV<7.s,— of  all  this  class  of 
beings  Crf;aturcs  ti[i|^h  t-hese  nro,,  they  are  yet  in  a  rela- 
tionship to  Him  tbat^p  lower  creatures  can  be.  Thus  we 
see  why  the  angels  j[vo  'sous  ot  (io'l'  (Job  i.  G;  xxxviii. 
7),   as    ''Spirits',  ",.  and    man    trio,    he    is    a   •  spirit  '    and    a 


<( 


son. 


Note  too  how  c:ix(|i'ul  the  language  is.  Man  has  a  living 
feoul  and  is  one :  and/this  too  by  the  inbreathing  of  God. 
Yet  is  God  not  srad  f^  be  t^e  Father  of  his  soul  but  of  his 
spirit.  How  tl4is  harmonizes  with  the  spirit  being  the  dis- 
tinct speciality  f)l'  maa^filone  in  all  this  lower  world  !  Had 
it  said,  "  Fathct-  of  soiraf^  .  or  had  the  beast,  as  men  contend, 
a  spirit.  God  wouUl  hav6  lieen  represeuled  as  Father  of  the 
beasts  of  the  field.  But  the  language  is  precise,  as  all 
Scripture  is,  and  in  harmwiy  with  Scripture  and  with  nature 

But  this  is  nSpKfc  whole  of  what  the  Word  states."    As". 
He  is  the  Fatherj||||ii  He  '-the  God  of  the  spfrits  of  all* 

?csvii.  16);  "all.flcsh  "  being  of  course 
ther  places  ••  allmen,"  but  charac- 
fonly  his  lowest  part.     So  we  find 


flesh  "  (Numb.  xfj. 
h«re  what  it  is  iiig^m 
terized  by  what  in  h 


fGen.  vi.  12)  that  beforcTtoct  ftood"  all  flesh  had  corrupted  his 

laikelli.  ♦>,^'\'ill  flesh  shall  see 


# 


'^ 


86 


FACTS  ANf)  THKoUlks  As  TO  A  FOTU RE  .STATE. 


/ 


% 


the  salvation  of  (iofl:"  of  course  in  orther  case  all  mankind, 
and  only  these.  ^~  '  .     • 

In  this  expression  then,  "the  God  of  the  j<pirits  ol  all 
tlesh,"  we  f?ee  airain  God  in  relationship  with  the  spirit  of 
man.  The  beast  has  no  (Jod  that  vm\  1k>  called  his  God; 
ami  man,  for-ettin-  God.. and  living  to  \x\m^i>\\\  j.eeomes  a 
beast.  The  outv.nrd  presentation  of  thi»s  you  may  find  m 
Nebuchadnezzar  lindin.u'  his  portion  with  the  beasts  (Dan. 
iv.) :  the  moral  of  it  is  in  l*sa.  xliv.,  •^.Mari  bcinu  in  honor  and 
inderstandint;  not  is  like  the  beasts  thai  perish."  Their 
ihing'is  the  fruit  of  there  bcin^'  n<»  i)roy)er  link  , with 
,  such  as  man  has. 

.bus  then  we  have  in  a  very  striking  way,  and  as  <fon- 
.^nini,'  all  that  has  gone  before,  man'.>^  link  with  (Jod  to  be 
Ids  spirit,— relationshij..  moral  character,  responsibility,  and 
even  his  perpetuity  of  beiii-jc.  all  b(»und  up  with  Jliis. 

Let  us  now  gatiier  up  the  Scripture  statements  upon  the 
subject  we  have  t)een  examining:— 

1.  The  1-odv  is  not  the  whole  man.  for  he  is  often  said  to 
be  in  it  or  aW'nt  from  it.  cl)lh.-l  u-ith  it  or  um-lothed. 
Thus  for  fait  hihe  body  is  the  <lothing  of  the  man,  and  his 
-tabernacle;"  whidi  supposed  jpir  inhabitant.  Paul  has  a 
vision  of  umitterable  rhinirs,  :iVid  d.x-s  not  know  whether 
he  was  in  the  body  or  oUt  of  the  bo<ly  at   the  time  he.  saw 

them.  ^ 

2  -In  the   languaije  of  sense   man    is  iihMiiiii<'d  with  the 

body;   for  faitlifwith  what  dwt'lls  in  it.     The   Lord  lay  in 

■Joseph's  tomt..  yet  cohfessedJyUis  divine  natur-  did  not  lie 

there. 

8.  Man  is  spirit  and  soul  and  Ixtdy.  , 

4,  Spirit  is  not  an  universal  principle  floating  in  tlie  at. 
mosphere,  but  a  sep.-trate  entity  in  everNymdiviaual.  "  spirit 
of  man."  "spirits  of  nu']i."  It  was  formed  within  him  by  the 
Lord,  and  all  hiV  knowledge  is  ascribed  tr,  iU  This  spirit 
the  beast  has  not,  ^^ 

f).  The  soul  is  not  the  body,  but  in  the  body.  Beasts 
have  and  are  living  souls,  an-J*  man  is  trailed  a  soul  to  distin- 


■■:.■  »■ 


^ 


giiisli  ritm  Sroui 
called  '♦  spirits.' 
spirit  unci  the  l»o<ly, 
tion  with  it;  the  neat. 


\ 


nip  Tp  ooD. 

_j^iiii:nijL;eiit'ereatureK,  Who  are 
the  link  alsj>    between  the 
of  th(>  latter  while  in  connec- 
Ifection,  nay,  of  appetite,  lasts,  etc.     , 
6.  It  thus -characterizes  the  nian  himself,  so  as  to  be  i den-     , 
tified  with  him,  soul  unl  person  i)eing  used  as.  the  samt^r 
thinj,'',  while  in  the  intermediate  disfllivbodied  state  the  gen- 
eral tepn  tor  hiii  is  that  he  is  a  spirit.  ^  .     " 

7.' Ai^ain  the  soul  is  that  throu«;h  which  man  was  swduced 
and  fell,  and  whidi  characterises  the  natural  man  as  led  by 
it.  ;it  is  thu.s  specially  eonnectpd  in- Scriptui'e  with  will  and 
lu^t,  with  sin  and  with  afonemeut.  ;.     ^     „.----.  -^-- 

8.  By  the  possession  of  a  spirit  distinj^uishinjx  liim  from 
•beast  man  is  in  relationship  witliQod,  the  Father  and  God 
of  si)ii'its,  and  is  a  moi^l,  responsible  beinjjj,  made  l\>r  eternity  ■ 
in  contrast  witli  the  >  beasts  that  perish."    ' 
^'  To  tiie  \l\\v  and  t"V  tln^  testimony ;  if  they  !:p.eak  not  ac 
cording  to  thi>i-Word,  it  isl)ecau8e  tliereis  no  light  ki  thera.'V 


y:-:  ■■  y:.ypyyry---'::y.\::y':,y                                                                                 ■'X,yy'  *■.     -, 

■:--y-    .  .7'^-'-:,-^-  ./■■-■•  ■,•-:  -r  r\;  /:*/^...^ -.A:  ■.-'  \'r'   ■•  ■'  ■'-;,....     ^^ ■■V -■•■.•»■-;:■;■ '-vr 

1      -          V     ■■              ,    ■           -r                        .■;/..■■■                  ■■*       .                                  ■*     ,.,         ,          ■■-      .;f,,.     .■_•.'■                                                             -             '■     ■             ■                   ,•..•■                                           •.-.■,       ■    fi'       ■".i.--                         -.■*• 

,..■■•-•"-.».  ^  \  •■■.,'':.' ^    ■•  .■■.:..V':  '.:v  ■•■'■:■■•.■"---   \"-'-  •  ■■•      -      ■..•■■■.    .■■••-■'-/..■   ■•■ 

^■.    ■■.■'-.  ''       ■,-•■•                    ■:    ■  /■••■■  ■■    ■.■■■    ;■■.(.   '.■-  "■  '             ■ .  .  ■■    ■'.    ■        *"■■..-•     ■  '                 w.                -■.■■,.■•'■ 

•     •••        •■.:■■'-■  -    '...•.,,'■..   •     ;■;./..•,'■.■    ■,;-;-y^'*.-    ■  ■  ;   *        ■    •   "    ..  .;  ,.  -                                                               ■.     '                            ■■   '•o;;- 

^■'-    ■.-.    ■■•     ^  ;     •    .-                        ,r       .-':■,.-■       /;-:-;;.^.  :7- -..;.:.  ■••(■                  ,.^          -".--/;.-.'                 -v-      .-.       V"                ..    'i  -                             ..:•■•■...,.>: 

■'        .,■        •■■       ':.-     -l-y       :      ■     -        ■     .:,^-<'---/-,  ■■•■■■-.              ■■      -■■.       .    V;     ■        •      ■■               .     -     '     '     ■■■       .    -       ^-      '•:,      .          .X  ^U^.'-  ^",; 

.      :/•    ■■           .'--,/...                            ^    :■*-;     .        '.      '        ,h:   \        ■"    ..   ',                  Z'                .  ^       '        .       ...  ■         . .-                '           ,               '.       .             ■               "            ■                           .'r"" 

/.- ^  :•  .^     ..••'•  V       ■■/■-■■'■--<'■:  ^  •  n/W  ■■ .     .:■•.■     •->■.'::■    ...                 -vV"       .-    "            ■    ■■■'..■■■' 

'•./...■■-         .  .    -    .  .        ■■  '■         •.'■;■   t  ■-..    .        .              '••.,.■      .   -  ,  .   ♦                                          ■,                  .              •   .          ■,--.,,-  ■■'■  ■  ■ 

■^'r-:    ■•■■  -        ■•     .  ■  '■■        ■  ■-'      -  '.  ■•■  .f  ■-■■■  V  -■    .;.,,'-.                    ..;■■■                                 „■,    .-.                    .   '  y .      »-              .■■■■:■■" 

■;/  ■      ■    •             ■:  .■.:            .■     y-■^■■  •   :';V^                     ■   '■■  ■  y.     .  ■•■         .               '. .   -         .•■■:■          ■ '  •  ■         -      / 

'•'■■■'':•.    •.:/•.■■    ■-     ■".'-.' "-y-K--    '■;■■:'■■'■  -i' '■■■■' v'~ -,■-'•'-'''■''-.'■■-■.'■' ."          "'    «  ':•  ■  .    ',-'■.  y? 

■  '      '  ■  y        '    ■  yyy-'y    "■■■\"' .■  ■■•..:"■'■-■•■■■■;:  ''  ."■-'■'■  ^-  -,'."-'-.y  ^*  ''   .■,;•"■       •'    \;,;  ^    ." ;  :•■ 

■'-  .■    -'■                                                            ■  '  ^    ,v     -,       ,                         .  ■              ■ ,    \  .   "      ./            ..■'■-'.        ■"■/'■'                "'«'■"'■"-                                                                                                                                                       '           I. .-■'''  '          ^           .'•     ' 

'y  : -'    ■-.    --    ■■■■■V"    '  •  .'—     ■':y-----.-y-   ■     '"      .■•".■■■.  "-  >■.   '  •'     .'■■•:;•■,"■':.■■.;    .:.  .   -  '■ .    ••  ■ '^ .     ,:•■■ 

.^:";-"       '■■.'.-'■■-'■  •...■■■•'■  .\'.  ■■:■"-■■::.,.•'■;' -7-''.         ?"          ..-■■:  :-t"  ■,.;'■■•     ■.,..■,.■':-,•■        '.-':-;.■.:              '•.     ''.   ;■        /.,■'-'- 

.^■.    .■■■•■.::            ■■--    •.                  -  \i--  ■  •     '■     -           •■•.      •-  ..            ../.■■            ...                               .•  ■•    ■.        -          ..■■.■.;                   ■■          ■                      ,..               -.  ,  . 

■■.■.-;■    \        .:^-   -      •  Y,;-..:  •■.;....  ■      ■,    ■•■          ■.;■..       ■  ^ ,    .■  '     .-,■■               .-•            :  ;•■.      v' .          ,  ,.  .              ..'.- ^      ,,■  ;       „■ . 

7  "  ■■       'I-                   ...-..,■■-             :  V  -'■■.'. .            ■■■■:■•■■.:.■■■.,.■.,"■-■•       ■    ..  >       ■,'.,'•..,  v^  ■■       ",     1.      .,:.:'          .-■■■.. 

■,:•                                 :•     "■-■■■^        ■   ,■■-.■.     :..  ■</.-■  .'■■.•     ■'     „'■   .  :*,    ^   ■  ■■  ■    '      '     ■      >       -        ••  ..        •  .-::■        'y^^  ■'    .  v  ::■■    <<■  ^    ';..   '    '           '  .■■         '■■ 

■      ■                                                                 V                           .'■.-.■.'..                ■'.'.     ,t     .:'-■,'    .             .        '        .  T           ■         '        "    .                   ,,                                                                                                                                      ,!     '  -■                             •■•■*"                    n 

■' .- :       -     .            .          ■: 

■  -  ,."     '.J  ■■        -    ^.■'  .'-.;•■■■■  ^"    ■..■■.-.■■-■-■■  .■■■;.■                   .«    <             ■     "^                *     ■        -J'  .      ■-'.-•'-        ..  •     -  ■       %  -* 

X            -•  ■   •  ■  •■-                                                         •                    .    ■*  .                   „'■ .            .......           ■■-■-..-■-         ■_■■■»...                           •■■ 

'  ■    "  .             ;    ■                          ■."■■.                             .  ■             ,  ■!"                      "■■■■■'"'■-"■.■■■        .       '.          -           •             ">     I                 ,     -  ■  ■          ■■■■-■■■'               .-''■■•                .■..-■■                                     ■" "             ^  ■ 

-  *  ■     •     ■                                                 .  ■                                                                                ■.■■-,■■■.-■               -    ..-            .     -    ■                           ■    ■                            1                      '^  ■  1.'                  .        -  .     ^                  '■...■                     .  ■      ,-                -—                  .                                           .           ,    :,-  ■ 

-           ■       -       -                                                                                                       .                                                                     .'-.,.-■.                -■        -          .            .                                                                                      ■-•              .             ■           ^        ^    ■   .                -..-...,                                                             .      •■    -        ■     -                      :■           -'                                 W,        .-.  ■                                           f  - 

:-.    ■'                   .,.■..-■---»■              ■.'  ■                                                       ,.:■•■■:                     ,                              ^:,     :     ■     -•     ..                                                  ■       -        -.._..            ■     -  ,   ,  ,  *t                 ■.-             ...    ^^^    . 

--.-■-^        -■        ■■'.■                       -.■:■;;.■■:,     -.;.■:.■  ..-,.-     .-■■.      .--      ■     ■.-.    ^     ■.  ^^^  ■.-■,-   -r.,    -,     "  y^..^^-,  ^  :■■,.,  ,A.  ;.;  -.4- ,.,.,^;     .      ,■-/■.-,.■ 

■.  ."           ■  .^  \ -'-■■:.-■■■  .\-  .  -:..\    ::r -.%;--'■■''. z----^:^-^                   ■..•..  •.;-:.■  :r,v^-  ^  -   ■:-■;"  - 

\              ■  :     ■■    ',  y- .  ■  ■  ■■■:    ■  ."  ■yy\-:'^y.ri:    ■  •''■..■:■.  ■   .  ■  :■::■   •  '-v,-^       •;  .:>.  .  -.  ■ 

^^^^^^^* 

.■.■.-■              ..    -^     .,      ;*         ■;    .       ■  ■:   :     -       ;,   .■;  .          ••■■..■                    '.,:         .-■    ,  .■  ^         .       ■    -.:.        .'.v^    •.     . -■ 

^^^H^i  -      * 

y--'-''''     '  ■..■::;;'„,"..  ;^  "•.-■■■.;"  ■*.  ■::'-i"^ -■  'y- ■;■'■---    .r.  y:  -  y,\::'y:''i  - ,,,  .y_:y  -../■yy-  ',  -''y^   '_■■•  y 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^k. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^L^ 

_■'■■*■' 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^M^--*^:;-  . 

■■-'■■ 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^PP^*^    V 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^^: ---..* 

■'.;        *'-'■ 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^■^'  ..-t^^-. 

'■."              '     '       - 

■■■■■■■■■■■■■^■■■■■MHi^^^^^^::.^ 

■:     ■      ■       - .  ...               .  .      ....            ■,-■.■.'■■    i           ,.     *■.-..     ■■..':  ...:.■     .      ......  -,.      ■-■-,■..                ..»...,..-....            .  ■  ■•?»..- 

^^^^^^^^^^r' 

../.;.    .       .,      .    ■■      .:y  :  :■/       y-'.y'.\    ■  ^:' ■■.■■■'':.•.■'.■■■  ■^•'  ;■:■■■■■■■■.;.     ■  "^T  \       ^  ■■■■■-    ' '''■  yy.  - '    'M~y'- 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  '.,.' 

.  •■"   "  ■'  ■                    --     .     -•  -        ■■      ■               "'-■■•,'■        "..>^"'.:  .   ,  , ;.    .-      .'-        ■  ■■  • .          ..■■.«  .,.•-•.               .  ■  ...      ■    .     .;  . 

^^^^^^^r 

■     '             .    ■    :      -               '.       4..-                   ''    ..              .-  >          -.  ,                           '--■'■.  ..  ■    ■-■,.■ 

■    -         ■             ~  ■■■-■•    ',.                 '■-■'.''    ■-'.■•       ..'■:-'■■■■      f    '         ''\*y     .       -  ,■  -.                       .-'                       '.;             '.•-.-.'  ?  ■ 

"^            :     ■           -  ■    -  "               .■;;■  ".-■"-■              -■■  '              ■             ■    '.     '  ,             ■   "■    ■             ■•'      y      ,     .            .,/■■;..■."    ;"-  -;-■:;   '         '■■"■■     ■     -v 

^T'     -''  ^.'.y  ■  'v-  ■.' ..  *^'''  '■"■.               1^''-"  ■  *"'■.-  x"'  '■■ 

'■\.-..  ■■■  ■■■  ■  *  ■  ■  'y    ■  .;:■•.■  '  ■■•■■.:.■• "  ■■■-■'   ■'.  .■^■."■■.  .  :■■■■'  ■  '  :  -■  '■  ■■■■■■  '-  ■'."■■'•  ■■  .-yy 'y-y.  ■':h  ■.•;../:     ..,-'   r-^p-    'y  y 

■'"'■■.■■■'.,'■;.    :,.-     '     y     .        y        ■■■   .   V  .       .'■.'     "'-^'^  y^-:     y':  yyy  -yy'  ■!■  .  '■-.-  ■■"."■  ■-■■:^:.  .■*-  -■:-v- 

-  -^    "■  •■          ■■■     ;- •    -./■.:-:- .■.:■...-•    -v;::     c'-    .r-  ■..  .'■7/ ::75n^  -.^"^■•*  .n  --'-■.^■-■: -■.-,:■.: 

■  ■"  '             :    ■                   .      -■                 ■-.■;.'                         ..     ^^■■..■        ■-■■              ■    -.-■■■-.-■■   ■     -.    ■.:•■■  =-;=^,;\     ■:■  ,-:.        ■..."-■,       -.      «;■■«■■•.■ 

•     ,      .  :    .                               ■   ■    ....   .,       -               .-.         ...        ■   ••;•■.  .,     .■     ■             „,,.:■::               ■■.-■'.■ ."  V.-..,.;'-  ■         ■■■          -    ■■     .■;   '■^■:,         ■"■  I'-' 

-y-       ■'    ''":                    ,  J ■■       -■•             '    .    '      ■..:•■■■■''■;■..;:.■■•■"';"     ".'•'■   •'.-i ■;.:/■  '    ../.^A"    'i    ."■..".'■■■■'";;:■  ■..","■■.■.-•.,;.■.-;■■ 

-r-   --  :                                             ■■           ■     .■        ■                                       ..•     .:■■-■    ;.-...■:>.      ■•,    .   ■      '■■   ;:■     ;■   --      ■       ■,.   ■,,:.'-    \---"\         .5—.-*^      ■■■--.,:-.:  ^  v    '  •» ' 

\-  ■■-  -.  -                          .-■.'■                     ■'■■■■    — .■•-    -:.«■:.-.,  -.-..-'^   ■„  .....   ..-.■■■..  \  7,-.-     :,;,    ■•■....    ^  ■■"y-y--y 

...                          .     ;>   ..                                                                                   -.      -.    ■      .■        '      :--''      .      :;        :-.^          ■■>,'■      vV,..,.'            ,%■...    -   -,     -■  ...      -  -,.\                   .     ■ 

■:■■■.■•■•'■■■".■-.                                              •;..,  ^'  ■..■■-.     :    ■.-           •■.;■■,./.    ■^■■.,..              '^-7 ';  ^.     ■■\:,.  ■■  -i^..'^:^:  ■■*:A:''''^V»:" 

■.    ■■  ,     ■■        "     ■      ■'                                              .                                                                             ■    :-        -r/;         .-■;-..;.,■..;,::■■.,..:..:       ..X.       :-'-.       ..           y'-dk:-:'      .i| 

^^  .    ;.--   ■■  ^■•: :-:■;■  V  ;:X--  -i-'^-'^^.-:*.  ■  A- ^v.^--v:yi4:^i| 

-                                                                         ■                                               ■     *      \    V                                              J^               .  iW"    ■    ■■-^^m 

•     '.     ■ 

.■ 

.  "■  ■•\          ■    v.-  '-- .  *■  «■  '^^m, 

■:y  :-%:- 


♦ 


■  N 


V        9 


0' 


^ 


€» 


!      "      . 


W 


.«» 


(>;.) 


BrltlBb' 


Woods, 


•»-i;- 


Oak. 


\ 


«>:?■ 


W 


131  .     • 

■■■•'..■  ■  -     ■  ■     •  ■  ,'  .<D  •  ;■     ■■    . 

The  closer  tlie  annular^riiigs  are  together  the  better  as  a  \^ 
rule  will  the  timber  be.  ^s:.  *; 

Planks  cut  from  a  log  will  always  warp  away  froiij^the     Warpiog. 
centre  of  the  original  tree,      V,    -  ,^  r- 

Theplahlf  cut  exactly  through  the  centre  will  shrink 

but  not  warpi„ 

-The  chief  British  woods  used  in  the  R.C.D.,  are'oak,  ash, 
elm  and  beech.  ^  ,  .  .«  . 

Oak  is  thQ  stroiij^est,  toughest  and  most  lasting.  It,  how- 
*ever,  contains  an  acid,  which  corrodes  iron  in  contact  with 
■  .it,  ^  ■:-■.      / 

Ash'  is  tough  and  remarkably  elastic.     It  is  used  for   **  Aah 
shafts,  handspikes,  felloes,  &c.      It  does  not  stand  weather 
well,  and  is  very  liable  to  suffer  from  worm.  ■  ., 
/    Elip  h  a  very  cross-grained  tbugh  wood,  therefore  it  does 
"wt  splinter;    li  is  also  very  durable  under  constant  Wet. 
Beqch  is  a  hard,  Btt'on*^  wood,  but  does  not  stand  ex- 

losure.'  ■  . """          -;  ■^^''.-  "  ■. :                     ^-     . 
^    The  following  foreig^n  .woods  are  tised:  ^  

*  African  oak,  is   stronj^er,  heavier  and  ftarker  than  Eng-  African  Oak., 
lislioak,  for  which  it  is 'iise^  as  a  substitute.  "      . 

Sabicu,  is  exceedingly  strong,  heavy  and  durable.  ^  It  is 
used  for  parts  where  rubbing  action  may  be  expected  and 
wei<yhtis  no  object,  sucli  as  tlie  blocks  in  a  rear  chock  carri- 

*  age,  bollards,  &c.     It  is  grown  in  the  West  Indies.     , 
(^  f  eak,  an  gast  Indian'lmd  Afi'ican  timber.      It  possesses 
<rvekt  str^gth,   toughness   and  durability,'  but    splinters 

"readily.  "    *     .„    ■  .  "  ' '' ■     *^         '.  ■  '       V". 

It  contains  an  essential  t)il  that  keeps  off  insects.  .  v-   ; 

-    It  is  used  far  work  for  foreign  stations-       ^  ^   ,  4^    '  "   ,  f;D^ 

JJahogany,  is  of  two  kinds,  "  Honduras,"  from  Central    Mabogany. 
brica,  and  "Spanish,'\froih  Cuba  and  other  West  In- 

ian  Islands.    '         ;  ^        *. 

It  is  strong  in  all  'dii'ections,  andlceeps  its  shape  under   **  .  ^ 

toying  ciB^mlstances,  as  to  heat  and  moisture.  ''  .     • 

Ij^onduras  IS  ligli^er  and  inferior  to  Spanish. 
I*ine  is  soft,  light  gind  elastic,  and  is  of  several  kinds.  Pine. 


4>-/ 


Blm. 


Beech. 

■>"  ■  ■ 

Foreign 
Woods. 


Sabiou. 


Teak. 


i)  -.  • 


f 


1^^,  .*_ 


-M»- 


#■■ 


'&: 


/\. 


Demi. 


■••    -r.  -.  :  ■    '    132'  .  ".  '   •-    ■'- 

Pine  proper,  from   the   Scotch  fir  grown   in   Korwny, 

Sweden  and  Noftb  America,    'it  is  red,  yellow  or  wbitc. 

Yellow  alone  is  used  for  the  interior  fittings  of  waggons.^ 

\        :   "  Deal"  is  eithej-  white  or  yellow.    It.  is  the  produce  of 

.^      the  ScJotch^fir,  and  is  iwl  Jor  ammunition  boxes  and  the 

boarding  of  waggons..        *  •  \ 

^    Larch,  a  fitrong.and  durable  but  knotty  timber.     It  is       Ur«b 
I      •   only  used  "  uphers,"  or  small  trees  for  ladders,  &c. 

Deal,  sawn  up,  is  classed  as,  ''■  planks,?'  "deals,"  atid 
;- " .      "  battens,"  according  to  width,  yiz. :  if,  0  and  7  in. 

'the  contepts  olf  -a  log  are  computed,  if  of  oak,  elm,  or  Meaaureioent 
/     foreign  wood,  by  square  measure ;  if  of  ash  or  beech,  by 
:    rounS  measure;   bectause  in   these  the  outer   layers   are 
sounder  and  better  than  the  inner.     ^.  _      ..     " '•  x 
.  .    ^  :■    :'.     .-:"■    ■  :V  ..,--■--  .     •  -    ■  (m^i  girth   in  ,feet.  ) 

Round  measupejt  Qmfta^      |  --  yr"^'  "       ^  ^^ 

length  in  feet  =^:  content^  in  Gsbic  feet> 
*  Square  hieasure^  Mean  widtji  X  mm  de^h  %  length, 

(in  feet  in  each  case)  =  contents  in  cubU^ 

Stoning  /timber  is  expelling,   asmr^  may  be,  .the    ggaaoning. 
natural  moisture  in,  its  "pores;  tWs  js;dofte>Ither  natural^ 

or  .artificially.  .     ^'•  <#'    ^       ,  ''    '       /^  

"in  natural  seasoning, the 'iyofija  4s  cji^^^^ 

posed  io  the  air,  sheltered  from  rain  mid  bigli  wind.     The 
time  reqpired  in   En^Ian^  is  one;  jear  for  each  inch  in     ■ 

thickness.  „  "     .    t       • 

^  Artificial  8<3asoning  is  done  by  sut/p/iting  the  tmiber^m 
a  chambei'  to  a  current  of  hot-air  or  stenfp,  ^   ^1^ 

,  .  ^TTiis  is  a  mu(;h   quicker  process  b»t  ii^^m^kes  the  vTooc 
;    more  brittle  And  less  durable  than  if  naturally  mmmeA, 


■i  K, 


/■ 


# 


/ 


^l 


^iBJA'Ufe. 

.^:Jro|n  is  received  %"  .<l)bf radt '  in  the  form   (#igirdfir ;X, 
*i^T,  angle  t,  round,  sqiiare,  flat,  and  plate  iijon,     It  is 
.Usted  in  various  ways,  as  to  its  power  of  being^ent.  i-nto 
.  :-various  shapes,  both  ~wheh  hot%id  wj^^n  cold.        %   . 
' '      .Round,  square  and  flat  is  bar  iron  6f  tliat  sectiori. 


W 


/Iron. 


^ 


"1" 


:>.*      ./ 


■Al-    ^J- 


IS.- 


'W 


v.s 


»  — 

\ 


« 


\ 


iZ 


,x 


,  '\" 


\# 


*        i 


I'    // 


7     Plat< 

'     tain  an 

with  01 

FIa(( 

120°  w 

^      Bptli 

fibre  o1 

«•  (Engl  is 

Mall 

-tain  ire 

a  sort'  ( 

Stee, 

tested 

Thei 

—  cally  k 

:C. 

(1)  T. 
Zi 

Ci 
C2)T 
\      2: 

•       >     0 

(3)Z 
L 

'",    The 

the  til 

nxeitet 


Th( 
«heini 
tlio  ed 
cal  ta 

Lfct 

...   '"'V      ■  "^' ". 

■:■>■.     ■  ._    1  , 


■u 


4v^ 


-.l^" 


133 


•V  . 


\-: 


i 


;     N 


\.'      i 


Plate  iron  lias  to  stancl  bending  when  cold,  tliroiigli  cer- 
tain angles,  according  to  its  tliickife&a  and  whether  it  is  bent 
with  or  across  the  graini,  *  V        ' 

Plate  of  any  tliickness  mnst  stand  bending,  when  hot, 
120^  with  grain,  and^OO' across  it.    / 

Both  bar  and  plate  iron  must  stand  a  strain  with  the 
fibre  of  22  tpns  (English)  per  square  jnch,  and  of  18  tons 
(English)  against  the  fibred  ' '^ 

Malleable  cast  iron  is  a  term  applied  to  castings  of  cer- 
•tain  irQn,  which,  by  an  after  process  of  annealing,  bccoilie 
a  sort' of  Bteeh     lUs  very  tough,  and  reftises  to  weld. 

SteeJ  is  received  as  "  blister,"  "shear,"  or'  cast  steel,  and 
tested  practically  as  to  its  qjiialities.  |p  ^        \ 

There  are  tin-fee  principal  alloys  made  use  of,  all  techni 
cally  known  as  njtetal^ 


Mallea' 
cast  iro 

Steel. 

Metal. 


For  pipe  boxes  and  sheaves  of  blocks. 

This  is  the  hardest,  as  it  contain$  most 

tin. 


/ 


For  rollers. 


Copper,"  86.8 
(l)'Tin,        12.4 

Zinc,  .8 

Copper,  86.5 
(2)  Tin,        10.83 
^     'Zinc,        2.68 

}    Copper,  84.2   Tl.       '  "  "  .  -  ,'       .      ■ 

Tin,  7.9    fFor  bearings  and  nuts   of    al^yatmg 

^^^Zinc,'      '5.24  [         screws,  &c.  '     . 

Lead,  ;    2.62  J  'j  •  '        ' 

The  usual  method  of  preparing  the  alloy  is  to  melt  all;, 
the  tin,  zinc  and  load,  with  a  small,  propoftion  of  popper, 
^nd  cast  this  into  ingots.     These  ingots  are  broken  up  and 
melted,  and  the  rest  of  the  copper  added. 

,  Lkathek,  Ropej  &c. 

The  leather  used  is  tanned  with  oak  bark>  and  not  by      j^^^^^^^^ 
cheuiicals.     To  prov«  tliisi,  cut  a  small  piece  and  moisten 
the  edge ;  u  bliick  rnark  «low(i  centre  of  edgedeiioted  chemi- 
cal tanning  ;  a  bfowu  «aloar  sliews  oak  tanning. 

Well  tunn^'l  leaih*3r  UiUtiii  not  crack  when  doubled"  up. 

Liiiii]m  mua  Ud  j/^VIo/fl^ally  dubbed,  being  first  well  Preservotiop. 
cleaM.     ff  hi  \m,  emjf  jhm  months.     If  in  store,  once 
in  two  y«ar0.        ... 


^ 

■:i      ,• 

'■'■-Iff 

. .-.  Ir  1    -      ' 

■   -      ,1                    '     „  .. 

i 

'■-,'' 

1 

li  ■ 

' 

If 

, 

> .    , 

feafe 

^: 

■   '■    ■         :^ 

^^ 

^L^ 

1^ 

l^^ll^^ 

i 

t  •.■:»-...: :■/,.•:,,  :■  ...-■x'^;-  -...-.  ■  '■'ir:-y-':  .■■;,:::■' ^*:,,/v„ 


"  *^..^' ■-„;'':  ■'^■^'  ""-""''"'■''■'  ":  t: 

iV.  "■"■""  ■■..',. 


V.     '        ''  ' 

It    . " n  "tw;   V 


'"    '■■\-     -■■  '-\-        -  •>■  ■  ■  .;."  --"■■      : "  ..    ".-  .1    .,,,,"    .1 


Bul)l 

4  quart 

/      most  118 

The 
oxen  01 
bellovvE 
backs," 
skin,  fi 


A  re 
ber  ot 
Rope  i 
cordin] 
the  cir 

The 
tons  it 
cirCiiir 

,  Rop 
Hamb 
(tarre( 

GOA 

it. 

The 


..:■■«    "  tti 


■^; 


«,.   / 


134 


\ 


/ 


Rope. 


Dubbing  consists  of,  train  oil,  ono  quart ;  neatsfoot  oil,     Dubbing. 
,^      /..  4  quarts;  olive;  oil,  2  quarts;  tallo\y,  13  lbs.      This  is  a    ; 
/    ,  most  useful  receipt.  A 

The  chief  descriptions  of  leather  are  :  '*  Hides,"  fVom 
oxen  or  cows;  "  strapback,"  for  strapping  ;  "  bellows,"  for 
bellows  of  forges  (these  are  dressed  in  oil;)  "mill  band 
backs,"  for  bands  of  machinery.  -  Also  "  basils,"  from  sheep 
skin,  for  the  inside  strapping  of  boxes. 

Rope. 

A  rope  is  formed  of  tliree  strands,  eacl>  strand  of  a  num- 
ber ot  yarns,  and  each  yarn  of  a  number  of  fibres  of  hemp. 
Rope  is  either  white  or  tarred^  and  of  different  sizes,  ac- 
Icording  to  the  number  of  yarns.     The  size  is  expressed  by        ^^ 
the  circumference  in  inches. 

The  strength  of  rope  when  new,  i.  «.,  the  number  of     Strength, 
tons  it  will  bear,  is  found  approximately  by  squaring  the 
circumference  and  dividing  by  6. 

Rope  is  issued  in  coil^  of  113  latlioms,  marline  and 
Hambro'  line  (lighter  natures),  in  skeifts,  and  spun  yarn 
(tarred  yarn)  in  lbs.  \ 

Government  rope  has  a  coloured  thread  running  through 

it.  '■-     ■     ■  '     '.  ■  ■'   ' 

The  following  are  the  principal  ropes  and  tlieir  uses : 

12  incii,  white,  slings  of  sheers. 
9     "  "      straps  of  sheers. 

6     «  "      main  tackle  of  sheers,  guys  and  slings. 

5     "  "      gun  falls  (heavy.)  ^  # 

4    «  "      light  gun  falls.  •    ;■#"'/    ■    '\ 

3     w  «^  ^ heavy  giJn  tackles  iind  drag  rope^L^ 

/2i  **  '   .   "    "lig^i*    ^    :    **i  ^         "• 

4i  "  tarred,  guys  of , derricks,  slings.    ^  • 

'*       4/*  V    *"'     parbuckle  ropes,  lashingft,     '4 

a    "  "     "      atraps,  la  *  ■    ' 


ff) 


'■*■■ 

..;,;  ■ 

1- 

\    . 

.    N;'   ..    ■.  .1 

\ 

"    : 

♦ 


"> 


#" 


»    -' 


Hf 


2" 

s 


"      fiiff-lackM*  lashings." 
"  "    lever  ropes,  lashings.     „ 


'/ 


\\ 


*  „  " 


.,*«■■'  -. 


♦ 


',-^.  - 


•P, 


» 


#  \. 


..■*9, 


'■  4  '' 


A^iie: 


.  :-..   ''■^' 


%l 


135 


*  Paint.  *  . 

.Lead  paint  is  used  for  woodwork,  as  it  gives  a  better 
body  thati  zinc. 

For  irorf  carriages  PuHbrcJ's  black  is  used,  painted  over 
Ju  field  carriages  with  lead.   . 

All  new  articles  receive  three  coats.  ' 

Iron  must  be  cleaned  before  painting. 

Hard  stopping  is  used  to  stop  "shakes";  is  made  by 
mixing  dry  white  lead  with  gold  size,  1  lb.  of  former  to  1 
gill  of  latter.  .  It  is  better  than  putty  for  large  cracks. 

Putty  for  cracks  is  made  of  1  cwlj.  of  ccrmiuon  whitening 
with  2J  gals,  raw  linseed  oil.    "     •    %^    v 

Varnish,  made  of  equal  parts  of  boi^  oiT^nd  copal 
varnish  ;  is  used  for  the  heads  of  side  aiffti  for  rifled  ord- 
nance, «&c.  «r 

Ordinary  composition  is  iwade  of  lamp-black  24  lbs., 
litharge  13  oz,,  boiled  linseed  oil  7^  lbs.,  beeswax  U  oz. 

To  preserve  bright  iron  work,  mix  3  Iba.  tallow  and  1 
lb.  white  zinc,  and  it  will  preserve  bright  -iron  trom  rust. 


Paiot. 


Hard  stop- 
ping. 


Putty. 
Varnish. 


Water  proof 
compositioa. 


To  preserve 

bright  iron 

work. 


J 


{•         % 


i 


^  ^  ■: 


U: 


••>■*-«♦'■ 

-     .■;     •.  fX'    '       ■ 

. 

':    %  'i 

%        ^ 

.  .' 

^^f;f^/  ;/'• 

■/ 

/          •        ,                          ■■■(-.■               '       ,      »   '         ,  i 

" 

■  ■*     *    . 

■;V^.. 

'    ■     •      '■     ', 

.■    •■//  -'  •■..•.    ■-■■'.■    ■    ' .  ■ 

■  t'f 

■'  • 

1  ^         '       ' 

**■ 

■j 

r 

^_  ____    .___^__ 

-                '■ 

* 

U\     . 

.    .  ■::    ■■,      r-..i.:r  ■■:■ 

*'                     t 

r 

1           ■  -i 

■  ■,'■'.  / 

■  r'' 

■  ' 

^' 

^      - 

-    •  ■•■.-.-  .           „   '           .  ''•  '    ■■    ■','■'   .  •■ 

* 

1          /  t 

'■    ^    ' 

.     - 

■.•,-;fr.  i  ••■   ■'   ;    ••■■ 

:■■  h: 

'■ 

'<!, 

— t    • 

"■   ■ 

1 

] 

i.-    .' 

'«■ 

,"• 

\ 

■    ,      ■* 

■ 

I 

p;'  ■ 

■*''.' 

,# 

it   J 

4 

*l  ■ 

1,       -,■ 

11 

« 

*         '  " 

V 

1, 

■■1 

■ 

■ 

HH 

^^r    A 

^ 

^^^^^1 

■ 

^^^^^^H 

^^^-   i^'- 

" 

^^^^^^^^^1 

^^^^^1 

^^^^^^^^^^^^1 

^p"  ->  «  . 

,1 

1 

^^^^1 

■ 

HH 

^^^^^H 

^  ■  ■«,.<<«   ,  ■ 

■■1      ■     ■    \   -    . 

^^^^1 

■ 

^            ^ 

" 

i 

^^^^^H 

r   .;  _  ^:  -  -?  . 

\  }  ■  ^    ■; 

. 

<^    '    '»^^^^| 

1 

^ 

^^ 

'       9 

,-yS- 

% 

.  . 

J 

I 

^  ■ 

.  ■  ■'  '■ 

■■'-,. 

^^^^^^^^^^^^ 

' 

w 

;    ■     .i»  '■  ■■ 

■1      .  ■' 

^ 

.-  ■  ■ . 

:     . 

M 

w 

*■ 

■%■ 

-[■—:      4k     ■ 

J 

f 

*        ' 

A 

w 

— ; 

^^                          '         ■    m 

^ 

1 

" 

.       1 

^^^H 

^ 

J 

■ 

■ 

V 

t 

* 

\ 

• . 

\. 

t 

■  .  'i^ 

^ 

1 

( 

( 

1 

^ 

} 

F 

r 

« 

•   . 

'/ 

f    - 

< 

■    -i    ' 

■• 

. 

/ 

f 

lP 

"l* 

■  f 

' 

/ 

. 

<; 

-    ". 

■■       '" 

n* 

.■■■V'' 

J 

'■      '; 

■-» 

"       ■ 

» 

» 

» 

^ 

1 

—■;■- 

• 

■  . 

■   ■. 

r 

« 

;-;•   .; 

- 

■„!.. — ■-.-_ 

* 

______ 

-■■  -j 

1- 

- 

■>■■■ 

4 

;, 

r   'iir 

■#" 

> 

■■'% 

■;-- 

,^^ 

siaSi 

___ 

^^^^^ 

^ij^ 

^■..,  V;._: 

^^H 

^^ 

^^^ 

^^^ 

^^ 

^ 


-P^ 


B 


AMociatioii  for  Infonratton  and  Inwos  ltoiMi««iiMnt 

llOOWayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  2091O 

301/587-8202 


I 


i 


iiiilii 


' » 


Centimeter 

12        3-       4*5        67        89       10       11       12       13      14       15   mm 

|i|ii|i|ii|i|i|i|i|i|i]i^i|i^i|il|i|i^i|ii|i^l|iyl|ii/l|ii|i|ii|l^^^^ 


Inthes      * 


lU 


13.2 


1.1        I 


^  Lfi    120 


■t 


H 


L25  1  u    1 1.6 


V- 


,m 


MONUFRCTURED  TO  flllM  STRNDRRDS 

-  <•   "  '-       , 

BY  RPPLIED  IMRGE.    INC. 


>     ■       v^ 


w 


is        FACTS  ANP   THIlOBIJb^S  AS  "TO   A  f  UTURE  ^TATB. 


I 


PART  II.-DEATH  AXD  THE  LXTERMEDIATE  STATE." 


CHAPTER  X. 


DEATU. 


/ 


We  have  already  got  a  long  way  towards  the  settlement 
of  the  question  as  to  what  death  is  according  to  Scripture. 
I  say  according  to  Scripture,  for  it  is  remarkable  how  little 
the  class  of  writers  we  are  speaking  of  make  it  really  a  ques- 
tion to  be  settled  by  Scripture  'at  all.  They  generally 
assume  that  we  know  all  about  it,  that  the  word  speaks  for 
itself,  and  that  our  experience  of  it  should  settle  the  matter. 
So  Mr.  Roberts  speaks : — "  The  popular  theory  will  not 
allow  that  a  dead  man  is  really  dead.  .  .  It  is  incorrect  in 
orthodox  language  to  say  that  the  man  is  dead.  .  .  In  real- 
ity, therefore,  the  word  '  death,'  as  popularly  used,  has  lost 
its  original  meaning." 

And  thus  he  defines  f6r  us  what  death  is.  "In  order  to 
understand  death,  we  must  have  a  definite  conception  of,j, 
life.  Of  this  we  do  know  something,  since  it  is  a  matter  df 
positive  experience.  All  iee  hacc  to  do  is  to  bring  our  ktioio 
ledge  to  hrar^  but  this  is  what  the  majority  of  people  have 
great  difficulty  in  doing.  Their  minds  are  so  occupied  with 
established  theories,  that.,thoy  are  blind  to  facts  under  their 
immediate  cognizance.  Thrjpwing  metaphysics  aside,  what 
is  life  as  knoxm  ixpcrlmentally  ?  It  is  the  aggregate  result 
of  certain  organic  processes.  Respiration,  circulation  of  the 
blood,  digestion",  etc.,  combine  to  generate?  and  sustain  vital- 
ity, and  to  impart  activity  to  the  various  faculties  Of  which 


>v 


/ 


to 

df  > 

no* 

,ve 

ith      , 

eir 

lat 

ult 

ihe 

)al- 

ich 


>v 


DEATH. 


m 


we  ar«j  i^omposed.  (!)     Apart  from  this  busy  organism  life 
is  unmiitiifested,  whether  as  regards  man  or  beast,"* 

The  "  experience  "  itself  is  more  than  qucstloMuble.  Most 
people  Avould  imagine  that  instead  of  ''organic  processes" 
l/eneratin'j  life,  life  itself  was  necessary  iii  order  to  the 
organic  processes.  Mr.  Roberts  has  somewhat  misread 
the  facts  here,  and  his  definition  of  life  consequelitly  fails. 
Physiologists  do  not  believe  it  to  be  quite  so  simple  a  matter- 
•''No  rigid  dcfifiition  of  life  appears  to  be  at  present  possi- 
ble," says  a  late  writer ;  but  again,  — '•  we  are  compelled  to 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  life  is  truly  the  cause  and  not 
the  consequence  of  organization."!  Much  less  then  is  it  the 
consequence  of  "  organic  processes."  / 

But  our  business  is  not  with  physiology  but  with  Scripture. 
Mr.  Roberts  plainly  has  no  need  of  it  in  this  matter.  Only 
take  for  granted  that  tlie  body  is  the  whole  man,  and  you 
need  no  revelation  to  tell  you  what  death  is.  As  regards 
the  body  death  is  plainly  the  cessation  of  all  practical  exist- 
ence. And  if  the  body  be  the  whole  man,  the  dust  that  lies 
in  the  tomb,  death  is  for  him  of  course  the  ^xtia|^k)n  of 
beinf'.  "  Apart- from  this  busy  organism  lifel  if^unmani- ' 
fested " :  that  is  all  we  need  say.  Revelation  th'ere  is  no 
need  of:  we  have  only  to  apply  the  knowledge  w^e  already 

have.  -  "C 

•  Mr.  Constable's  argument  as  to  death  is  mainly  founded 
upon  the  views  of  human  nature  which  we  have  already  ex- 
amined, and  upon  those  of  Hades,  which  we  hope  shortly  to 
examine.  But  he  has  a  chapter  «pon  death  itself,  of  whi^li 
it  only  needs  to  gtve  a  brief  outline,  as  explanatory  of  the 
final  argument  with  which  he  closes  it. 

His  propositions  are — that  ''  death,  Avhich  God  inflicted 
upon  the  human  race  for  Adam's  sln^  was  a  great  calamity 
for. all  who  should  eAdure  it,"  that  this  death  has  passed 
upon  all  men  without  one  exception,  and  "not  part  of  it> 

*  Twelve  LeciureH;^ 

t  Manual  of  Zoology,  by  Prbl.  Nioholson,  pp.  1,5.    'Jd  ed.  (^Amt-r.  i, 

1872. 


*    .». 


•I 


'5* 


90        FACTS   AXD  THEOKIES  AS  TO  A   FUTUKE   STATE. 

but  all  of  it  ■'  upon  every  one  alike  (if  it  <lid  not,  God's 
Word  would  fail,  and  we  have  no  security  for  anything); 
that  nothing  was  said  about  the  dliration  of  the  death 
threatened,  that  being  left  open  for  God  to  sliow  His  grace:  ■ 
"death  might  continue  in  some  or  in  all,  for  a  short  time, or 
a  longer  time,  or  forever:  "  that  death  began  for  Adam  from 
the  very  day  he  disol>eyed,  and  reigns  over  believers  and  un- 
believers alike  till  the  day  of  resurrection.  liis  argument 
closes  thus:  "" 

•  "  If  death  reigns  until  the  poric^  of  resurrection,  and  if  Jeath 
during  this  period  is  exactly  the  same  thing  to  the  just  and  to 
tlie  unjust,  it  fallows  beyond  any  question  thibt  l)otli  just  and  un-  ^ 
just  are  then  wliolly  and  altogether  dead.  For.no  ou(^  contends 
that  during  Ihis  ptrioil  the  just  are  iu  a  conditipu  of  ujisery  ; 
neither  does  any  one  euntund  that  the  unjust  are  in  a  condition 
of  bliss  :  but  that  condition  which  is  neither  one  of  .b^^r  of 
misery  must  be  a  condition  of  death  or  n«n-existen,c^j^^Bpis  is 
the  one  condition  that  can  be  common  to  the  redcom^TriPu  the  • 
lost."*  "  ;f 

Mr.  Constable's  logic  and  his  memory  have  .surely  failed 
him  here.  Think  of  the  i-ashness  and  fli|*pancy  of  assertion 
which  would  pledge  the  whole  truth  of  God  upon  the  posi-  ^ 
tion  that  all  men  must  die,  and  have  died,  exactly  according 
to  the  threatening  to  Athim,  in  the  very  facre  of  the  fact 
that  neitlier  f2noch  u6r  Elijah  died,  an<l  that.tliose  alive  at 
'Christ's  coming  never  will !  "  We  shall  ni>t  wkX  sleep,"  says 
th<;  apostle.  So  God's  truthfulness  js  gon(^  for  ^[r.  Con- 
stable ! 

I  need  not  answer  this,  1  am  i^ure.  That  not  eyen  atone- 
ment could  righteously  set  aside  the  exaction  of  the  penalty 
from  even  one  of  those  subie(!t  to  it,  shows  how  little  therOi 
is  meaning  in  atonement  tor  his  sotd.  But  his  argument 
fails  signally  and  entirely  upon  (juite  another  ground  than 

this.  ; 

For  why  should  non-exUteiu'C  Ije  "the  one  condition" 
upon  which  death  should  be  the  Hanui  to  just  and  unjust  ? 


*  Hades,  p.  79. 


■>^  i,\ 


DEATH. 


i'r 


m 


(»r.'iiit<Ml  tluT  uni  <l«'!ul  :irrk('.     Ko  oikv  «U'nioH  it.     On  lh<' 

Kii|»|M>sitiou  th;it,   death  is  tin- ^mnUTinij;  of  tlic  link  lietwecii 

soitl   and   body  (and   so  it   is),  wliy  cannot   just  and   unjust 

alike  1)0  in  f/iit  oondition  without  thi'^  <|U('Stion  6}'  happiness 

«>r  misery  being  raist'(Vl)y  it  at  all  ? 

His  argument  is  laborious  nonentity.     T4)  state  it  i»  to 

expose  it,  *  Yet  it  iinnislies  ]\[r.  C'onstabh'  with  all  the  jus- 

tifi(!ation  he  has;  for  the  trlumpli  over  ortiiO(h)xy  which  tills 

the  next  chapter.     1  <lo    not  purpose  following  him  in  it, 

because  we  have  to  do  with  Scripiure  simply  liere.     I  would 

say,  however,  that,  while  every  expression  of  those  he  quotes 

from  caniiot  l)e  justiiied,  yet  aft.er  all  they  are  more  in  the 

spirit  of  Christianity  than 'are  his  own:      For  with   them 

"  Christ,  has  abolished  •^eath,"' — for  him,  it  w»)uld  seem,  not. 

For  just  and  unjust  alike,  alike  for  Jew  or  Cliristian,*  under 

law  or  mider  gospel,  as  to  what  deatli  is  itself  there  is  no 

difference.     There  is  jio  '•  williuLj  rather  ,to.  be  absent  from 

f  '' ' 
the  body  and  jiresent  with  the  Lord  '" ;  no  "  desire  to  depart 

and  be  with  Christ  which  is  far  better."  Of  course  sjicli 
texts  are  owned  to  be  in  Scripture,  whatever  explanation 
they  may  be  susceptil)le  of,  but  the  spirit  of  them  is  not  in 
liis  heart.  For  him  death  Is  still  an  enemy,  a  curse,  a  pen- 
alty which  no  atonement  has  ettaeed  or  lessened.  "Death 
is  after  all  the  king'of  terrors,"  says  ]Mr.  Constable  :  has  he 
never  read  of  One  who  cftme  that  "•  thi'ou<ih  death  lie  migiit 
destroy  him  that  ha<l  the  power  of  death,  that  is,  the  devil, 
and  deliver  them  who  through  fear  of  death  were  all  their 
lifetime  subject  to  bondage  "  ?  ■ 

We  have  alreadv  seen  reason  to  believe  that  death  is  not 
extinction;  that  the  living  soul  in  man  is  not  extinct,  when 
it  ceases  to  be  any  longer  life  to  the  body,"  We  cannot 
therefore  argue  from  the  effect  of  death  upon  the  body,  as 
to  what  it  is  upon  the  spirit  or  the  soul.  We  have  seen 
that  the  word  of  God  does  on  the  one  side  use  the  popular 
language,  the  language  of  sense,  and  identify  man  with  his 
body.  This  is  seen  in  the  class  of  texts  of  which  Annihila- 
tionists  are  so  fond.'    The  man  is  the  flesh  and  blood  we  see 


1)2         FACTS    AN1>   THEOUIES    AS   TO    A    FUTUKK   STATE. 

and  touch.     A  dead  body  is  a  dead  man      We  all  speak  so, 

"  unconscious  wholly  of  being  exposed  to  the  cTiarge  of  mate- 

■  rialism  for  doing  so.     Our  daily  speech  in  this  way  might 

convict  us  in  the  profounder  wisdom  of  another  generation, 

of  disbclioviug  equally  with  Annihilationists  themselves,  in 

*  the  existenoe  of  an  immortal  soul.     Yet  we  really  do  believe 

it  in  spite  of  that,, and  even  the  attacks  of  Annihilationists 

hare  not,  a.s  vet  .at  aiiv  rate,  made  us  a  whit  inore  cautious. 

We  quote  even  ''  Dust  tliou  art,"  and  believe  it,  and  yet  do 

not  believe  that  Nve  are  (ill  dust.     And  we  fihd  on  the  other 

side,  and  vise  as  frool  v,  a  nrimber  of  texts  which  Annihilation- 

isra  cannot  teach  us  how  to  use,  which  speak  of  man  being 

"  in  the  bodv,"  "  ///  the  llcsh."  "  at  home  in  the  bodv,"'  "  ab- 

l*cnt  from  the  l)o<ly,'  "  out  of"  it,  aiid  yet  believe  that  the 

body  is  the  man  too,  in  spite  of  that.  '  v 

y    Let  us  now  fairly  put  'the  question  apart  from  any  partial 

.answer  it  m;iy  have  gotten  in  this  w.iy  :     Is  the  Scripture 

^teaching  of  deatli  extinction  r-^is  it  "ceasing  to  exist,"  or, 

as  they  delight  to  quote  from  Job  x.  19,  to  '•  be  as  though 

me  had  not  been  "  P 

You  put  seed  into  the  ground,  and,  in  the  Scripture  lan- 
gudge,  ''  it  is  not  quickened  exi^cjH  it  die''''  (1  Cor.  xv.  36). 
Does  the  living  germ  become  extinct  in  order  %o  bring  fortli 
the  harvest  'i  Are  the  '•  oiganur  i)roces«gs''  extinguistie.l  m/iVi 
Where  would  the  harvest  be  if  they  were  ?  Yet  this  is  in 
Scripture  twice  over  spoken  of  as  "  death."  And,  if  you 
reflect  a  Utile,  the  analogy  to  the  death  of  man  is  nparer 
than  it  seems.  There  is  that  pf  the  seed  which  is  cast  off 
.as  refuse,,  and  decays.  The  germ  within  "puts  off  its 
tabernacle,"  but,  so  far  froni  becoming  extinguished  in  the 
process,  springs  up  into  tlje  plant  thereon.  Is  there  no 
lesson  in  tliat  ?  no  type  V  no  analogy  commending  the  use 
of  the  strong  word  "  death ''  in  this  case  ?  Would  it  ever 
have  occurred  to.  Mr.  Roberts  or  to  any  of  his  brethren, 
that  "  except  a  do'rn  of  wheat  fall  into  the  ground  and  die, 
it  abideth  alone,  but  if  it  die,  it  bringeth  forth  much 
fruit"? — Does  the  grain  of  wheat  become  extinct  in  order 


:.y-.i\K-^-: 


•■'\. 


,  -J 


DEATH, 


m 


to  .bring  forth  fruit  ?  They  have  never  ( at  least,  that  I  can 
find)  attemptf^cl  to  illustrate  their  doctrine  by  it,  that 
death  js  the  cessation  of  existencej  the  extinction  of  organic 
processes.*      ^  ",■'"' 

The  death  of  man  is  spoken  of,  moreover,  in  language 
which  is  not  douolfiil.  I  have  fully  admitted  already,  and 
without  hesitation,  that  there  are  a  large  class  of  passages 
which  (identifying  rnan  with  his  body)  speak  in  the  ordinary 
popular  phraseology  about  it.  Passages  too  there  are, 
which  will  be  oxaminod  in  the  sequel,  \thich  may  present 
•difHbulty  in  harmonizing  them  with  the  language  of  other 
parts.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  the  clear  full  light  of  the 
New  Testament  affords  us.  in  many  simple  and  intelligible 
statements,  abundant  satisfaction  as  to  what  death  is. 
Sotne  of  these  I  shall  now  proceed  to  examine,  together 
'with  the  arguments  of  tiie  class  of  writers  to  whom  I  am 
replying.  ^ 

1.  As  we  have  seen,  the  apostle  Peter  styles  d^th  the 
"  putting  off  of  his  tabernacle  "  (2  Pet  i.  14).  T^e  language 
of  Paul  is  sinmlar,  and  if  comment  be  needed,  may  supply 
it :  "  if  the  earthly  house  of  this  tabernacle  were  dissolved  " 
(2  Cor.  V.  1)./ 

The  language  of  Annlhilationists  upon  these  expressions 
shows  their  perplexity.  Mr.  Ham  says  on  the  latter  passage, 
"Man,  the  one  compound  beinp:,  is  compared  to  an  'earthly 
house  '  or  '  tabernacle,'  which  will  be  dissolved."  Similarly 
Mr.  Constable,  "  We   doubt  very  much  if  he  speaks  here 

*  Mr.  Roberts  lias  .tried  to  answer  this.  He  asks,  "  Where  is  the  liv- 
ing germ,  wlien  the  harvest  is  brought  forth  1  Can  Mr.  Grant  find  it  ?  " 
Most  certainly;  for  the  stalk  of  corn  is  but  the  development  of  that 
very  germ. 

His  account  of  the  matter  is  curious  enough.  With  him  "  the  vegeta- 
ting process"  is  an  "  invasion  "  of  the  vitality  of  the  grain,  which 
destroys  it:  a  parasitic  life,  in  short,  froi^'hich  the  sprouting  comes! 
And  in  this  way  he  finds  it  a  "distinct  and  .striking  illustration  of" 
death  being  extinction.  Upon  his  view  of  it  no  doubt  it  is  so.  But 
then  it  is  rather  a  new  theory,  that  the  living  germ  is  killed  by  the 
vegetating  process! 


/'-< 


.^. 


n 


JL.j^T'Zir  JT8s:irSij3^t^. .  * 


H 


FACT!?  AND  TUF0KIE8  AS  TO  A  FUTrilE  STATE. 


only  itf  thchodii,  Wc  think  lio  spoaks  of  our  mtite  jmsent 
hiiii'i^  which  is  not  Ixuly  only,  Init  body  animated  hy  soul. 
Ot  .tins  entire  being  (k'atli  is  the  dissolution." 

This  is  i)lainly  incorrect.  TliQ  apostle  distin'ijcuishcs 
between  the  tabernacle  and  the  one  who  dwells  in  it :  "for 
we  Avhich  are  IX  this  tabernacle,"  he  says  a  little  fiirtlipr  on. 
The  tabernacle  was  to  be  dissolved,  not  the  inhabitant;  and 
the  man  is  identified  with  the  latter  rather  than  the  for- 
mer. ^ 

'1.  Another  exjjression  for  death  in  the  same  i)assage  (2 
Cor.  V.  4)  is  "  beinjr  unclothed":  "no^-that  wewould.be 
Uficiot/icK'"  \  r  . 

p]ven  Dr.  Field,  materialist  as  he  is,\sj)eaks  here  of  "a  dis- 
embodied state."  ]\[r.  Dobnev  on  the  contrary  maintains 
that  "  Scripture  reco<;nizc«  no  j perfect l>/  disembodied  state." 
I  ask,  if  there  be  not  something  to  be  disembodied,  how 
can  you  use  the  expression  at  all  'i  Can  one  talk  of"  disem- 
bodied hrcath  ''  or  "  (lisembodicd  fife'.'*  "  ^^ 

The  j>utting  off  of  clothing,  if  that  is  a  figure  of  disen? 
bodiment,  as  it  is,  is  simple,  enough,  but  only  when  we 
recognize  a  part,  and  that  the  higher  ]>art,  of  man,  to  be 
somethingothat  is  not  the  body,  but  is  hi  it,  as  the  living 
soul  is.  Mr,  lloberts  indeed  talks,  as  is  common  witli  him 
when  in  a  ditKculty,  of  the  "inevitable  fictions  of  speech." 
**The  exigencies  of  mortal  speech,''  he;  says,  "  require  us  to 
speak  of  the  |)eison  as  an  entity  separate  from  all  that  com- 
j)Oses  liiiii,  and  irheu  Jhjai'e  i^  aJded^  as  in  thin  amc,  the 
effect  i.i  ;/rea/li/  hi  }(jJite)i((7^  4ittd  (i  theory  like  Mr.   Grant's 

,;^ .  Would  it  not  have  been  wisdom  to  have  in<pnred  tchtj  the 
use  of  the  figure  should  so  greatly  heighten  the  effect,  as  he 
admits  it  does,  and  whether  the  countenance  it  gives  is  not 
more  than  merely  "  apparent  "  ?  Surely  the  use  of  a  figure 
for  a  mere  abstract  jiersonalify,  and  a  figure  Avhich  makes 
the  alistraction  decidedly  the  higher  thing, — nay,  which 
goes  so  fiir  as  to  speak  of  the ^<'  abstraction  "  as  "  putting  oft*" 
ihat  which  is  llie  reality,  or  being  "  unclothed  "  with  it> — 


DEATH. 


95 


i «» 
>» 


is  Boraowhat  overbold.     But  what  difficulty  wijl  not  the  wit 
and  will  of  tnau  comhincd  surmolmt?  i^"'    "'^ 

Mr.  Constahle,  in  lilt*  comment  on  the  passage,  sihiply 
refers  this  expression  to  the  "  liadcs  state."  Witli  this  we 
are  content,  and  sliall  soon  'nuiuire  wliat  is  that  state.  But 
plauily  liere  <leath  is  not  cessation  of  existence,  what^er 
(which  for  tlie  present  I  leave  open)  becomes  of  sold  or 
spirit  afterwards. 

3.  In  the  text  in  2  Peter  (i.  !'>)  before  referred  to,  (jlcatli 
is  called  ''  decease,"  literally  exodus,  "♦leparture"  :  "  j\.ller 
rny  departure." 

Nowhere  llu;  man  departs;  where,  is  not  the  question 
yet.  The  hkih  departs,  lie  leaves  the  earthly  house  of 
tbis  tabernjKtle.  Say,  if  you  })lease,  and  if  you  can  jjjather  it 
from  the  Bible,  that  after  dying  ho  becomes  extinct  or  un- 
consciotis.  That  you  must  prove,  if  you  can,  from  elsv^where. 
Death  is  not  it :  does  not  infer  or  imply  it.  It  is«| "  de- 
-parture."  ^  f 

4.  And  to  tliis  agrees  the  expression  used  again  in  2  Cor. 
V.  (verse  8),  "absent  from  the  body." 

People  contend,  I  know  (and  it  is  their  only  hope),  that  l 
this  does  not  refer  to  death  at  all.  ISfr.  D(d)ney  thus 
attempts  to  pai:ij»hrase  it  l)y'"  absent  from  tluA  body," 
"this  gross  corporeal  investiture"  (investiture  of  whatV). 
Mr.  Ham  ■  with  al»senco  "from  our  natural  body,''  "our 
present  mortal  and  corruptible  nature."  Ellis  and  Itead 
speak  in  tbe  same  way  of  the  "body"  here  denoting  a 
"state  of  corruption  and  mortality,"  "  this  corruptible  body 
or  nature."  Roberts  says,  •'  Wbat  absence  from  the  body 
was  it  that  Paul  desired  ^  Xot  disembodinu'nt,  for  be  says 
in  verse  4  of  the  same  (chapter,  '  Not  that  we  Avould  be  un- 
clothed.'" Mr.  Constable  seems  on  th-e  other  hand  to  allow 
that  "  absence  from  the  ]>ody  "  applies  to  tht^  death  state 
while  he  will  not  allow  that  "presence  with  the  Lord" 
similarly  ai)plies  to  it,  but  to  resurrection,,  the  two  ])eing 
brought  in  tliis  way  tog(^ther  because  between  it  and  dying 


*•-*' 
U 


thei-e 

IS 

nothing 

but  a 

blank. 

(( 

.'\- 

This  " 

[the 

resurrection 

\ 

■■■'■    *■                 ■   ■    .  \ 

'■:/■       .        1 

^ 


y 


FACTS  AND  Til  LORIES  AK  TO  A  FUTlltK  STATE; 


State],  he  says,  "  We  have  no  doubt,  is  the  '  pr<;sciice  with  the 
I.6r(J'  which  Paul  here  bpoaks  of,  and  not  the  intermediate 
state,  as  Calvin  and  others  dn-uin.  For  Paul  had  jnst  ex- 
pressed himself  that  this  uiiclothed  con<li4i(rn  was //o^his . 
desire  or  wish.  He  could  not,  with  any  consistency  with 
Ihis  just  uttered  declaration,  say  that  he  should  view  it  with 
;a  good  satisfaction." 

Yet  the  "willing  rather "' ^/^a,>^,  according  to  Mr.  Con- 
|8iahle"8  own  view  of  it,  include  the  intcrinetliato  state,  if 
only  as  the  way  to  tli-c'  other,  ''  irlll'ni»j  fitth- r  to  himhscnt 
fi-o)n  the  boih/ aiuX  to' Itc  present  with  the  Lord."  Is  not  ■ 
that  "  desire"  Ibr  the  unclothed  stale  !  And  that  these  twp 
things  he  desires  are  not  successive,  but  contemporaneous 
^cijnditions,  is  manifest  also.  For,  wlicn  bo^.says,  "  trJiiU  we 
are  at  home  in  the  body  we  are  absent  froui  tlie  Lord,"  these 
states,  he  m'dst  adpiit,  go  togethvr :  how  then  can  it  be  - 
doubted  thatnhe  two  things  he  desires,  being  the  opposite 
of  these  conditions,  go  together  also  V 

Mr.  Roberts  and  others  therefore  with  better  judgment 
concede  this  ;  but  then  they  have  the  vjuitc^as  hopeless  task 
to  achieve,  of  making  "  absent  from  the  body  "  also  moan 
resurrection.  They  all  coincide  in  opposing  the  apostle's 
''not  that  we  would  be  unclothed"  to  the  simple  and  nat- 
ural interpretation  of  his  desire  to  be  absent  from  the  body, 
as  if  the  two  were  contradictory.  But  thjs  is  by  no  means 
the  case.  He  does  say  that  what  he  f/rofinul  for  was,  not 
to  be  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon,  lie  groaned  for  resur- 
rection, ti:ue,  and  the  unclothed  state  was  not  in  itself  what 
he  or  any  man  desired.  "  Still,  knowing  that  to  be  absent 
from  the  body  was  to  be  present  with  the  Lord,  he  was  after 
all  "  willing  rather  "  to  be  absent.  Death  had  no  terror  for 
him,  but  the' reverse.  To  make  '  absent  from  the  body  " 
apply  just  to  the  time  w'hen  the  br>dy  will  have  its  fulness 
of  bliss,  is  only  to  make  incomi)reh<'nsible  what  is  very  sim- 
ple.*.   "  In  the  body  "  never  has  the  meaning  they  attribute 


*  Roberts  .substitute.s 


stitutf's    "  anbnid  body  "  for    *'  body  "  iii  the 'above 
en  with  ^reat  naivflc''  rf>itiark><.  tliuf  "  Mr.  fjrnnt  him- 


■ntpnce,  and  then 


UK  ATM. 


07 


to  it,  and  that  thoy  havo  to  a<M  wohIk  to  make  it  suit  thfir 
tl'oughts,  iK  a  {.lain  proof  that  their  thoughtH  are  foieigii  tcr. 
Scripture. 

And  wlien  the  apostle,  speakiiii;  of  his  yftion  of  the  third 
heavens,  says  h.;  cannot-  tell  whetJier  at  that;  time  he  was 
"in  the  hody  or  out  of  the  l»o<ly,"  we  have  the  exact  expres- 
sion in  a  way  whicli  no  wonder  tliey  shrink  iiom  as  they  do.  ' 
,  -l*anl  could  nof  iniatjine  lie  had  j.ossihly  had  his  glorious 
body  when  ca,M;rl,t  up  theie,  an<l  lost  it  afterwards.  Yet 
he  snpi>oKes  he  nli^dlt  have  been  conscious  of  unutterable 
thinjrs  when  '-out  of  tlie  l,o.ly.'  If  so,  why  may  not  one 
(as  this  chapter  teaches)  he  -  absent  from  the  bQ<ly  and  yet 
present  with  the  Lord"'? 

I  slmll  have  aL^aiii  to  speak  of  this,  when  we  come  to  con- 
sider tlie  question  of  consciousness  in  the  disembodied  state. 
U  IS  sufficient  for  us  here  that  such  a  state  exists,  if  words 
have  meaning,'.  Death  is  tliat  disembodiment,  the  putting 
off  the  tabernacle  of  tl»^r)a^',  being  unclothed,  departing, 
a!id  being  absent  from  IJP 
>-3loieover,  we  liave  already  seen  that  Matt.  x.  28  asserts, 
that  the  death  of  the  bo<ly  is  not  the  death  of  the  soul. 
Our  Lord. bids  us  "fear  not  tliem  wliicli*  kill  tlie  body,  but 
are  not  able  to  kill  tlie  soul;  but  ratlier  fear  Ilim  who  is 
able  to  destroy  both  soul  andjbody  in  hell." 

Mr.  Hudson  allows  that  this  tciclus  that  death  is  not  the 
extinction  of  the  soul,  nor  involves  it.  Mr.  Dobney  follows 
on  the  same  side.  INIr.  Ham  wavers,  admitting  that  it  is  im- 
plf^"that  the  soul  is  distinct,  from  the  body,"- but  at  the 
same  time  suggesting  that  "  soul "  here  may  be-  merely 
"  life."  Ellis  and  Rea<l  interpret  it  to  mean  that  "  wicked  men 
can  only  destroy  the  present  being  of  tlie  righteous^  and  that 
God  could  raise  them  up  again."  Miles  Grant  interprets 
"killing  the  soul  "  to  mean  ."  taking  the  life  to  come."  Sim- 
ilarly Roberts  makes  "soul"  to  be  "a  life  in  relation  to 

.^  self  would  not  acktunvlcdgo  the  senleufe,  thus  deprived  of  its  piquancy  : 
yot  this  18  the  form  which  emlimlies  the  facts.' — So  that  the  language — 
UM'd  bj'  the  apostle  does  hot,  as  he  admits,  "  embody  (///.«?)  facts." 


^ 


i^- 


9» 


VAtTS  AN!)  TIIKOKIKS  Af<  TO  A  FLTUKK  STATE. 


those  who  are  Christ's,  which  cannot  he  touched  by  mortal 
man,  however  they  may  treat  the  body,  and  the  poor  mortal 
life  belonging  to  it."  *  While  others  say,  that  "  the  dead  in 
Adam  are  not  tksfnn/ni,"  because  "  in  consoqucnce  of  the 
provision  made  in  Christ  for  the  resurrection  of  x;very  human 
being  from  the  Adaraic  death,  those  who  can  kill  the 
body  (take  this  lifr),  only  suspend  our  being  till  the  resnr- 

rection." 

But  the  text  beibre  us  will  not  bend  t»»  any  of  these  criti- 
cisms.    If  soul   be    life   merely,  those  who   kill   the  body 
destroy  i(.     Such  a  phrase  moreover  as  "killing  fife"  does 
nbt,  arid  could  not,  exist  at  all,  as  I  have  before  said :  be- 
cause "killing"  is  in  itself  ''taking ///;,"  and  you  could  not 
speak  of  taking  the  life  of  theV//('.     "Life  to  come,"  or 
the  believei-'s   life,  jmnchr  does   itot  moan;  another  word, 
zoe,  is  invariably  usrd  for  it.     And  the  contrast  between 
suspension  of  life  for  the  present  an<l  utter, destruction  of  it 
is  not  what  the  j)ass:ige  makes,  but  between  a  killing  which 
affects   the  body  only,  an<l  the  destruction  which  will  over- 
take holh  bo<ly  aji<l  sf)iil  in  h<**l.     1  am  only  i-i*peating  here 
what  I  have  said  before,  and  what  Mr.  Hudson,  destruc- 
tionist  as  he  is,  has  sai«l  l)efore  me.     Vroof  ig  conclusive, 
that  when  man  dies  his  soul  is  not  touched  by  it.     If  it  is 
cons,cious  is  another  thing,  and  presently  to  be  examined. 
And  what  destruction  of  body  and  soul  in  hell  is,  I  do  not 
inquire  yet.     Suffice  it  just  now,  that  when  we  ^ut  off  the 
body  at  death,  the  soul  still  lives.t 

__..  _A. .- ,_,:  -_ ^— .:,-^'  '- 

*  He  ikJw  states  that  jjsuche  liere  means  "the  abstract  power  of 
life^^^ich  is  in  the  liancls  of  0(1(1;'  hut  there  is  nothin?  at  all  about 
this  in  the  passage.  Tie  further  brings  in  Matt,  xvi  25,  "  He  that  loses 
his  life  for  my  sake  ".  to  sliow  tliat  \^f^\^c^\(i  tJierf.  eannot  be  immortal 
goal,  in  which  we  agree.      I  liave  before  cansidered  llio  passage. 

t  Mr.  Edw.  White,  in  his  •'  Life  ia  Christ  "  fj).  %),  while  agreeing  with 
this,  considers  it  the  ir-ult  of  redemption  only,  and  quotes  in  proof 
1  Cor.  XV.  17-10:  'If  Cliiisl  be  not  raised.  .  .  they  also  ^bich  hav*^ 
fallen  asleep  in  Christ  hnvo  rinuc  to  nothing'"  nitmXovTo !  for  thus  h» 


k 


I    . 


-*fr 


( 


f 


k 


I    . 


\ 


COMHCIHlllUNUsk    AVrKH   llUAtfl. 


99 


*•%■ 

-^ 


AxmAP^^KR  XL 


COXHClOirSN'KSS    AFTKR    IlKATH. 


1. 


Thk  queHtion  of  yonwciousne.ss  may  now.  be  taken  u| 
Of  course  every  proof  of  it  is  proof  also  of  existence.  But 
many  who  allow  that  the  soul'  ^jv'.s/.<j  after  death,  will  not 
allow  that  it  iy  conscious.  Thus  Mr  Hudson  regards  "the 
soul  as  an  entity  not  destroyed  V>y  the  death  of  the  body, 
however  <lependent  it  nuv)'"1)e  upon  embbdiraent  for  the 
purposes  of  active  existence."  So  with  others,>whom  1 
need  not  liere  quote.  TIkj  thing  <;ontended  for  is  what  is 
unknown  to^  (while  professedly  })ased  on)  Scripture — "the 
^ii^ep  of  tlie  souh" 

mit  you  never  tind  in  Scriptuf-e  tl>e  sonl  sleeping.  The 
man  sleeps,  but  always  as  identitie<l  with  the  body.  It  is 
a  mode  of  speech  found  in  slater  Greek,  outside  the  New 
Testament/  It  is  never  the  soul  that  is  in  (juestion.  So 
Matt,  xxj^ii.  52,  ' '^nany  hodicii  of  the  saints  which  slept 
arose."  /Again  John  xi.  11,  "  our  friepd  Lazarus  sleepeth; 
but  I  go  that  1  may  awake  him  out  of  sleep,"— ri.  e.,  by 
raif-ing  the  dead.  So  Stephen  fell  asleep,  and  devout  men 
carried  him  to  burial, — i.  e.,  his  body.  So  "David  fell 
asleep,  and  was  laid  unto  his  fathers,  and  A'^/y-  ronimtlony 
Again  irt  1  Cor.  vii.  39,  "if  her  husband  be  dead  (asleep)  she 
is  at  liberty  to  be  married  to  whom  she  will'  There  it  is 
no  question  of 'Soul  or  spirit.  Again,  cli.  xl.  30,  "many 
sleep " ;    he  is  thinking  of  it  as  chastening,  not  the.joy  of 

explains  the  toria  in  the  lblU)\vin<f  vtMse :  '  If  in  thin  lift:  ortlt/  we  have 
,  hope  in  Christ,  we  are  of  all  men  most  miserable.'  " 

,t  deny  that  iiTto^XovTo  means  "  gone  to  nothing."    "  Are  perished  " 

^  as  in  the  Auth.  vers.,  is  the  propw  rendering,"  and  does  not  r/ifer  to  ma- 

''^  terial  destruction,  any  more  than  "  if  in  this  life  only  "  does.     To  die 

with  a  false  hdpe  is  to  perish,  but  not  in  the  annihilation  sense.  For 
—  the  meaning  of  a,ii6\\vfit,  see  ehaps.  xx..  xxi. 


'•^.^,cf3 


^«» 


I  h    ' 


*r 


*■ 


f 


<3> 


-.r_ 


|f-i 


i'    " 
\\     ' 

i;  ■■ 
■  ' 

[  -' 

I 

11 

t;. 

i 

t 


100  VA<n.S  ANUTUKOHIKH  ASTO  A  FUTURK^TATE.         , 

presence  with  the  Lord,  which  the  hoiiI  had.  Again,  ch.  Xv. 
6,  "  some  are  i'aHeir  asleep."— fnllen  out  of  tht-  rank  of  wit- 
nesses. Ch.  XV.  IS,  "then  t\ey  also  that  are  fallen  asleep 
in  Chrir»t  are  iierished.'  Ver.  20 :,  "  Christ  is  risen  from 
the  dead  and  become  -tlie  fii-st-fruits  of  them  that  slept."  . 
There  again  the  resurrection  of  the  hody  is  in  question. 

So  nhvays,  if  death  be  lo«ked  at  as  qhastening,  sorrowed 
over  as' we  do  over  the  breathless  corpse,  if  it  be  simple' 
history  of  the  outward  fact,  or  if  resurrection  be  in  question, 
it  is  here  that  we  find  the  phrase  which  people  have  blun- 
'  dered  over,  perfectJy  simi)le,-  intelligible  and  beautiful,  as 
we  gaze  upon  the  inanimate  form,  and  brusii  away  our 
te^i:s  at"  the  thought,  "  our  bro'ther  shall  rise  again.'' 

Mn  Constable,  as  usual   with  him,  contlMuls  for  the  iden- 
jtifie?ition  of  man  with  his  bo<ly,  and  absolutely  ignores  the 
Scriptures  which  identify  man   with  his  soul  or  si>irit.     He 
can  therefore  from  his  point  of  view  ssay  :  '•  If  people  will 
say,  it  is  only  the  body  that  sleeps,  then  they  must  allow 
that  the  body  by  Itself  is  man.     If  they  siiy  that  man  has 
both  body  and  soul,  and  that  these  united  constitute  man, 
^then  theyinust  allow  thai  botli  body  and  soul  sleep."     On 
the  sanie  principle  we  must    affirm   that    when   Paul   >vas 
,  caught  up  to  the  third  heavens,  inasmuch  as  it  was  the  man. 
Paul,  who  was  caught  uj^  and  man  is  body,  soul  and  spirit, 
tWerefore  that  about  whifh  he  was  ignorant  was  whether  he, 
hvdtf,  soul'  and  spirit,  had   been  "  out  of  the  body"  or  not. 
Mr.'  Constable  chooses  to  ignore,  it  seems,  this  wluJe  class 
of  texts.     No  wonder,  then,  if  he  lose  his  balance  and  fall 
into  error.     It  ix  not  only  his,  it  is  conmion  to  materialists 
,  of  every  class.     We  have  before  considered  this,  however, 
and  need  not   repeat  again  what  has  been  said  in  our  very 
first  chapter.  |>  .    '     ' 

.     .Mr.  Constable's  argument  as  to  1  Thess.  iv.  18  goes  beyond 
.the  question  of  the  api.lication   of  the  figure.     He  argues 
that  the  apostle  here  virtually  tlenies  the  commonly  held 
doctrine  of  the  intermediate  state.  N. 

i       "  If  thoso  h<'  wrot.'  to  inounH'd  for  sopiii-ation,  if  Paul  comfort- 

;.  r  - 


'I. 


,__j.: 


*   m 


'■.  i 


, -.f    •. 


*     -"i 


I 
■1*- 


CONHClOUSPfKSS    AFTEK   DKA.TH. 


lot 


«d  them  with  the  prospect  of  reunion,  if  he  pointed  to  the  resur- 
rection aa  the  consoUng  prospect  when-  their  longed-for  reunion 
would  be  ttcoonipLLshed,  th»m  by  every  fair  infereuco  he  did  not* 
beheve  or  teach  that  there  avouM  be  uni/  reunion  before  the  resur- 
rectiony 

If  the  premises  were  true   the   inference  might  be  a  fair 
one.     But  the  grief  of  the  The.ssah)riiaus  was  not  the  mere 
personal  grief  of  separation,  and  the  apostle's  comfort  for 
them  is  not  the  mere  P^ospec^of  reunion.     It  is,  that  "we 
which  are  alive  j^ll  remain  t®ie  cpming  of  the  Lord  shall 
not;  prevent  ipT'^cecle)  them  which  are  asleep ;  for  .... 
the   dead  in  C^Fist  sh^ll  rise  jirsC'    The  thought  of  the 
Thessalouian  saints  was  this,  that  if  Christ  were  to  come, 
as  they  believed  He  soon  might,  the  dead  in  Christ  would 
be  shutout  of  the  joy  of  welcoming  and  being 'with  Him     , 
then  by  the  fact  of  tlieir  death.     The  apostle  assures  them 
the  livino-  would  have  no  i)recedenco  over  the  dead  in  thia>  . 
reSpect:  the  dead  hi  Christ  would  be  raised  even  before  the 
change  of  tlie  living,  and  together  they  would  be  caught  up 
to  meet  the  Lord  and  be  with  Him.     Thus  the  intermediate 
state  was  not  at  all  in  question.     JIoio  could  it  be  for  those 
ALIVK  till  the  coming  of  the  Lorc^?     How  could  living  peo- 
ple be  united  with  dead  ones  in  an  intermediate  state  ? 

Abundance  of  inspired  testimony  there  is  that  death  is 
not,  for  the  soul,  a  state  of  unconsciousness.  The  passages 
»re  well  known,  and  need  only  to  be  cleared  from  the 
objections  which  have  been  raised  to  their  apparently  very 
simple  meaning. 

The  conceptions  of  the  Pharisees  upon  tTiis  point  are 
acknowledged  on  all  hands,  and  the  familiar  Story  of  Laza- 
rus and  the  rich  man  in  the  lOtli  of  Luke  is  confessedly  in 
full  accordance  with  them ;  yet  they  would  forbid  us  to  be- 
lieve this  to  be  anything  more  than  accommodation  to  the 
superstitions  of  those  whom  the  Lord  addressed.  Mr. 
Roberts  indeed  very  naturally  suggests  that  "it  maybe 
'asked.  Why  did  Christ  parabolically  employ  a  belief  that 
was  fictitious,  and  thus  give  it  His  apparent  sanction  ?  "    To 


31 
9 


■rK.  ■"■ 


V 


i!^:l 


!  I'  ■  i 


102         FACTS  .VN1>  THKOUIK.  AS  TO  A  FUTDHK  «TATK.        . 

.Uich he  answer.  0.aHe''wu»uotu^nga.^^^^^^^ 

once  ;  <W/(!)  ''^  %*^ f^ir  i.t^  tZ'ction  of 
man'^  testimony.  •  •      nu^aia  ^^^^ 

thit  "to  tlu3m  it,  w:i:s  not  given  to  knr,w  tl.e  niNsttrRS  oi 
that     to.  tncm  o       ihcrefoie  lU'  si><'l<^'  »"  P**'^' 

tlLv   iiUod  to  iustilv  tl>o  thing  lie-  I'K^a'ls  toi.     1  '>' 

wi     aeU,  ),ul  .,ot  for  Ui.  "uvkius;  .,.>.a.,les  (.»  h.  a-lmUj, 
3   t!./   .^'--■■-. "    Tl-  "."-oaucins  slavery  n,  o  a  ,,a>. 
..St'         <>nlyint.•oaua«g^vha.,u-^...•  ce-t.uv  -.tr.ct.o.^ 

hj  Mosaic  Unv,,c,-mi,te.l;  a„.l  if  iU-l  '^"^-V  ^";^';^^. 

al  introauclion  of  a  custom  that  ohta.no.l  wa,  not  sane 

1,,:  it,  .  i.i>o  .ho  in..-,,,,„c,ion  of  -what  ^f;^^^^: 
.avi'asM,pa-stition,,r„„Wton,Lasheo«ns,to    [...pauatc 

t     'Hus  .^a  ailVcveuce  whicl>  upsets  all  his  eouelus.ons. 
'*■  But  d,en.  he  asks,  -  Ate  wo  to  n.ako  a  l-a'-  «  .a™-,.  -  y 
and  throw  aw.v  l>lahi  tostin.onyV     Are  we  t..  tw.st  anjl, 
t^late  what  is  de!.r  to  ntak.it  agree  with  what  .e>,.,nlr  .s 
meant  by  what  is  aaraitte.Uy  obscure  .'  ,.,„■„,. lass 

I,,U.e  1  this  is  the  comn.on  r,.fu;.-e  ol  writers  ot  .h.s  clas  ■ 
M  I  ,  bney,  it  is  a-ue.  scn.s  to  a,l,ni,  all  we  elaun  about  .. 
■  o„,„,otr.aUv,since  he  conteu.ls  that '•  Scr,,,ture  reco- 
"^r^rfoeUy  aisenO,oaiea  s..er     He,.ob.O.^ a,n^^ 

it  therefore  to  the  linal  s.a.e.     15ul  ''-'^"'^'^J^^^, 
Lord  .hows  an  t.ngo.dy  n>a„  in  a  sla.e  ot  «  -  ^•'«*''-™ 
death.     Uow  Ion-,'  it  wouhl  last  is  not  n.tunated.     It  .s  t.ue 
: Se  .as  no  ho„e  for  bin,.     He  eouhl  „ot  '""?  '^;^,     • 
With  tl,o  l.rospec t  of  restoration. . . .  enjoyn.ent.     But  «  both. 

-^ ^ ■■ 


r 


,;5r^ 


-yi 


%. 


cojSsciouskess  after  death. 


103 


er- 

ad 

of 

ro- 

.  It 

3lu- 

ion 

ivill 

I'm, 

of 
ara- 

not 

LMl- 

the 
>ur<(- 
nits) 

par- 
ions, 
t,  the 
sano- 
once, 
lato" 

IS. 

lount,  ^ 
t  aiu|. 
ink  is 

class, 
out  it. 
rocou' 
ipplios 

"  Our 
58  after 

is  true 
self  up 
whether 


that  torment  should  endure  forever,  or  would  ultimately  de- 
stroy  him,  the  parable  does  not  intimate.  It  teaches  a 
-rriblc  and  hojicless  state  for  the'wicked  after  death,  and 

tMtJsall."  '  .  ; 

Edwcin  Burnham  also  seems  to  admit  the  doctrine  of  con- 
scious e^ence  after  death.  Speaking  of  eternal  punish- 
ment ho  sW"!So  far  as  this  tpicstion  is  concerned,  man 
may  be  conscdf^  or  unconscious  hi  death  until  the  final 
j^l(lgmen^  'riicrefore  the  parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Laz- 
arus  proves  n(/.:.ing  to  the  point  of  eternal  torment,  for  that 
parable  n-f(>rs  to  .•••w/*-:  frajisarfini,.  hei-ori:  the  judgment." 
But  then  he  adds, '•  The  same  maybe  said  of  all  those  . 
Scriptures  which  to  some  sj;em  to  teach  that  the  dead  are  in 

a  conscious  state.''  •  r\' 

For  the  rest,  all  seem  to  agree  whh  Mr.  Hastings:  "Of 
couri^Q  the  ]>nr<M'.  of -the  ricli  man  and  Lazarus  is  not"  reck- 
oned as  teaching  the  doctruie;  for  all  "laws  of  criticism 
forbid  that  parables  be  ma<le  use  of  to  teach  doctrines." 

Unfortunately  for  those,  however,  who  speak  thus,  they 
themselves  are' forced  to  admit  that,  parable  or  not,  it  is 
'« founded  upon  "  what  Mi-,  lloberts  calls  "  a  theoretic  fact," 
i.e.,  the  belief   of  the   PhariseGST-^that^  the^object  of  it, 
moreover,  is  really  to  lift  the  veil  from  the  other  world  will  . 
be  plain  if  we  consider  the  connection  with  the  rest  of  the 
chapter.     For  the  Lord  had  been  speaking  in  the  first  part 
of  it  of  man  as  an  unlaithfnl  steward  under  sentenc.e  of  dis- 
missal, but  with  the  goods  of  his  Divine  Master  yet  in  his 
hand.     He  had  thereupon  exhorted  theiKi :  "Make  to  your- 
selves  friends  of  the  mammon  of  unrighteousnesSj  that  when 
>%  fail,  they  may  receive  you  into  everlasting  habitations." 
Thereupon*  the  l^harisees,  who  wer^  covetous,  derided  Him,* 
and  to  them  He  pr:eaches -^this  (parable,  if^  you  please)  to 
sliow  how  what  w:y ighly  esteemed  among  men  was  abom- 
ination  in  the  siglit  of  (^o.^  The  point  is  here :  "Thou  in 
thy  lifetime  reofiivedst  tl^y  good  thhigs,"  and  now  "thou  art 
tormented.''     No  crime  is  charged  but  this,  his  failure  as  to 
the  unrighteous   mammop.     He   could  not  serve  God  and 

•■  '    •    •     .,-.  C-  •  .  ■.  ' 


(; 


104         FACTS  ANDTH«:OKIKS  AS.TO  A   FUTURE  STATE. 

mammon.  He  had  served  mammon  and  not  God.  And, 
"he  he,,av  ho  had  neglected  .as  lKM;ne^om  h.^ga^ 
into  Abrahan.V  i.osom,  l.c  wa.  tormontoa.  How  Uu^  ^ 
dressed  it.r.lfto<-<.votousPhansoos  IS  .as.ly  seen.     And  the 

state  deseribed  is  of  a  man  in.mediately  ^'^^^^"^ 
ment,   bef;^re    the    res.nrection    (>nd    tl>o    ^judgment,    vvith  , 
bpethreit  Btill  on  earth  to  be  preaclied  to.  ^  „ 

You  may  call  it  parable,  if  you  wdl.  The  state  of  the 
dead  is  the  very  thing  it  is  designed  to  c.dorce;  and  th^ 
rcpresentatVon  of  it  is  acknowledged  to  be  based  on  Phari- 
saic sentiments.  ,,  T^^-1 

II  ik  Singular,  however,  how  the  terms  nsed  by  our  Lord 

are  miarrelled   with.     If  literally  construed,  Mr.  Roberts 
urtres*  "  it  upsets  the  belief  it  is  cp.oted  to  prove,  and  su  - 
fititutU  the  traditipn  of  the  Pharisees,  which  Jesus  was  pa - 
V  abolically  using.  '  If  ^a  literal  narrative,  it  clashes  with  Ui. 
popular  theory  of  the  death  state  ia  the  lollowmg  particu- 
lars.    We   read,  ver.\21,  that   the  harjar   d.ed,  and  AV  as 
oumiED-hot  his  imnlat^rial  soul,  but  he,  his  bodily  sdf^ 
bythe/angels  into  Al\raham's  bosom;  the  rich  man  also 
died,  and  'vas  buried  ;  and  xn  hell,  where  he  had  been  buried 
(hell,  hades  and  grave  being  synonymous)  he  lilted  up  li.s 
■    eyes;' etc.     He  also  tells  us lhat -immnteiial  souls     could 
easily  have  got  over  the  great  gulf  fixed ;  and  that  if  the 
popular  view  were  correc-t,  a^splrit  might  have  been  sent 
to  the  five  brethren  without  one  needing  to  rise  Irom  the 

dead.  ,  ,        ,   ., 

This  is,  no  doubt,  said  in  serious  earnest,  although  it  may 

not  seem  so.     But  it  is  a  siK^cimen  of  the  blinding  delusion 

under  which  these  men  lie.     Think  of  a  man  telling  us,  tha 

it  was  the  tradition  of  the  rharisces,  that  men  were  carried 

'hodily  afler  death  into  Abraham's  bosom ;  that  hades   or 

4iell  and  the  grave  were  synonymous!  and  that  meii  were 

tormented  in  the  grave!     Tf  this  parable,  teaches  literally 

the  traditions  of  the  Pharisees,  this  is   what   he   ^ays    it 

*  teaches.  _    


.■■^ 


I 


!       ' 

^'  Twelve  Lo<>tiirP!<. 

* 

1 

) 

' 

» 

■/          I 

* 

'i       " 

'    :Mz:-: 

CONSC lOUSiN ESS   AFTEll   DEATU. 


105  1 


,^. 


1 

-I 
..I 


S 
i 

■J 


•  But  I  purBue  this  no  tiarther  than  to  ask  where  the  parable 
Htatesthat  the  beggar'^  "  bodily  self"  was  carriad  into 
Abraham's  bosom  V  Of  course,  if  there  is  no  other  8elf 
than  a  bodili/  one,  all  is  plain.  But  that  is  as  little  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Bible  as  it  was  of  the  Pharisees.  As  to  hades, 
and  what  it  is,  we  may  see  shortly :  But  would  it  not  be 
rather  foolish,  even  in  a  parable,  to  put  it  that  "  hi  the  grave 
he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torment "  ?  To  such  straits 
are  men  reduced  who  refuse  the  f^cripture  doctrine  of  the 
soul's  consciousness  after  .loath.  We  may  well  thank  God 
for  making  it  so  plain. 


Figuratlce,   no    «loubt,    the 


language 


is.  "  Abraham's 
bosom"  is  not  literal,  any  more  than  the  gulf  over  which 
souls  cannot  pass.  Nor  do  we  contend  for  souls  absent 
from  the  body  having  eyes  or  tongu^^s  or  fingers.  Mr.  Rob- 
erts asks  in  view  of  this;  how,  if  Ave  "feel  at  liberty  to 
admit  thenon-actuality  of  these  things  spoken  of  as  apparent- 
ly real,"  can  we  |)e  "  so  sure  about  the  reality  of  the  other 
])a^ts  that  apparently  favor  (our)  theory  of  the  death  state  ?" 

I  a/swer :  first,  because  it  is  addressed  to  Pharisees,  ariA 
founded  (as  Mr.  R.  himself  acknowledges)  on  their  belief, 
whichjthe  Lord  thus  takes  up  and  adopts  without  a  word  of 
/jirotest,  without  one  hint  of  its  being  the  gross  and  heathen- 
ish delusion  jNIr.  R.  would  have  it. 

Secondly,  because  figures,  as  it  would  seem,  must  neces- 
sarily be  used  in  speaking  of  a  state  so  far  removed  from  any- 
thing of  which  we  have  experience.  That  is,  words,  phrases, 
and  ideas,  borrowed  from  things  around  us  must  be  taken 
and  adapted  to  these  imseen  things. 

Thirdly,  if  the  object  were  only  to  represent  a  final  award 
in  resurrection  no  reasoh  can  be  given  for  not  picturing  that 
award  directly,  as  is  done  elsewhere,  instead  of  representing 
it  under  the  figiire  of  a  fabulous  death  state.  -  The  perfect- 
ness  of  the  representation  Avould  surely  suffer  by  so  unnatu- 
ral a  proceeding. 

The  figures  are  not  difficult  at  least  to  read  intelligently, 
for  one  who  is  as  to  this  point  of  doctrine  a  Pharisee,  as  we 


V' 


l.i 


¥r' 


n 


i  f. 


i\ 


■\i 


p\ 


IOC         FAtTS  AND  THLOKIES  AS  TO  A   FUTUKE  STATE. 

shall  see  Paftl  the  apostle  was,  and  as  we  may  confess  our 
selves  without  shame  to'  be.  And  thus  are  conveyed  to  u» 
thoughts  that  it  seems  in  no  other  way  could  we  have  so 
"  vividly  presented.  The  meanintr  is  only  no  clear,  that  thoSe 
who  oppose  it  are  driven  to  the  wildest  e.vpedients  to  escape 
from  its  plain  speaking. 

Thus  Dr.  Loask  transcends  even  Mr.  Roberts  in  grotesque 
effrontery.     lie   says*  as   to   Lazarus'    being   cairied    into 
Abraham's    bosom :   "  Fact    it  cannot    be.     Otherwise   you 
have  the  extraordinary  thought  of  angels  carrying  a  dead 
man,  a   loui/tsonu   corjpse,   to   the   bosom   of  Al»raham " !  1 
Shall  we  add  the  still  more  extraordinary  thought  of  this 
''loathsuine   corpse"    being   "comforted"    in  this   strange 
resting  place  !  and  of  the  rich  man  Avan ting  to  sciid  it  to  his 
five  brethren,  etc.     But,  says  Dr.   L.,  "this  parable  is   un- 
equalled  for  the  vividness  of  its  imagery  "  I     And  he  adds, 
after  the  usual  fashion :  "The  word  translated  ' hell'  here  is 
hades,  the  Greek  etpuvalent  of  the  Hebrew  67hc>/  and  of  the 
English  i)rar>;'  etc.  ,   Vivid  imagery  indeed  !  ^^^ 

Ao-ain,  "  Surely  soVuM- and  serious  thought  must  convince 
any  onts  that  tlie  conversation  between  the  rich  man  and 
Abraham  must  be  parabolic,  for  Abraham  himself  was 
dead.  (I)  If  Abraham,  Isaac  and  Jacob  are  consciously 
alive,  our  Lord's  argument  to  convince  the  Saddiicdes  of 
resurrection  loses  its  point.  God  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead 
but  of  the  living:  th< refoir  these  honored  saints  shall  Vist' 
from  the  dead  some  day;  that  is  the  argument,  and  it  ,i> 
irresistilde." 

*  Dr.  Leask  has  scarcely  read  the  passage  attentively 
enough,  or  he  would  have  seen  that  if  God  said  at  the  bns/i, 
"I  AM  the  God  of  Abraham,  ■  mdlle  is  not  the  God  of  the 
(lead,  Abraham  must  have  been  in  some  sense  livhig  then; 
or  it  would  have  been"!  ?^r^s•  Abraham's  (iod,  while  he 
lived,  and  I  ^r/'/ /^r,  when  he  lives  again."     ^^ 

There  is  one  other  argument  the  doctor  gives,  which  has 

somewhat  more  in  it:  that    ^^ neither j-cwards  nor  punish. 

*  The  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus.  - 


I 


ik 


i'  t: 


4' 

4. 


CONSCIOUSNESS   AFTER   DEATH. 


107 


this 


ments  are  given  till  after  judgment,"  which  Mr.  Constable 
has  (Enlarged  somewhat  more  upon,  and  therefore  I  leave  it 
to  look  at  it  with  him.  Those  then  are  Dr.  Leask's  reasons 
for  turning  aside  the  application  of  this  parable  from  the 
death  state  altogether,  and  applying  it  to  the  setting  aside  of 
Israel  and  the  bringing  in  of  the  Gentiles  by  the  gospel. 
This,  to  convict  "covetous  "  Pharisees  of  their  liability  to 
be  excluded  from  "y?ye/'/a.9i(m.7' habitations"!  *    ,  j 

General  Goodwy^*  attempts  to  show  that  the  Lord  in 
his  parabolic  teachings  did '*  </r/o/9«  some  of  the  prevalent 
[false]  conceptions,  and  proved  by  the  unerring  wisdom  of 
His  mod^of  treatment^  their  fictitious  origin  and  constitu- 
tion." He  adduces  the  first  four  parables  of  the  kingdom 
of  heaven  in  Matt,  xiii,  in  proof  of  this  position.  But  he 
neither  does,  nor  can,  show,  that  the  Lord  incorporated  any 
prevalent  errors  with  His  teaching  there  or  anywhere  crse. 
The  Lord  gives  us  on  the  contrary  what  is  simple  and  recog- 
nizable truth  as  to  the  form  1\he  kingdom  should  assume  in 
the  period  of  His  absence.  For  the  kingdom  exists  now,  and 
T  he' condition  of  it  of  which  He  speaks  exists  also.  The  "  pop- 
ular ideas"  Gen.  Goodwyn  seems  to  refer  to  are  but  misani" 
prehensions  of  these  very  parables,  and  not  errors  He  adopts 
in  anywise.  Let  him  put  his  finger  if  he  can  upon  one 
error  the  Lord  teaches  there  or  elsewhere. 

Now  hero,  if  the  consciousness  of  the  dead  is  error,  the 
Lord  does  teach  it,  and  without  the  least  warning  of  its 
being  such.  The  two  inconsistencies  the  General  thinks  to  be 
.in  the  parable  are  not  there:  viz.,  either  the  "  ^««?  condi- 
tion of  punishment  ■'  being  "  before  the  day  of  judgment,"  or 
dead  people  being  ''  in  the  body."  Very  strangely  does  he 
add  •  "  Thus  were  these  traditional  and  palpably  erroneous 
views  woven  into  the  Divine  discourse,  serving  the  purpose 
of  exp>osing  the  conceit  of  mere  human  theology " .'  Were 
'  these  things  "  traditional  "  ?  Certainly  not,  at  least,  the 
thought  of  being  in  the  body  after  death ;  or  can  he  produce 
the  tradition?   'Grantini;  thoy  wore  -traditional,"  and  also 


C, 


*  Truth  :iii<l  Tia<lifion. 


\l 


:■:  ^ 


108  FA<  TS  AN1>  TIIKOUIKS  AS  TO  A   FrTi:KK  STATK. 

"palpably  erroneous,"  if  their  error  were  not  jialpablcin  the 
tradition  themRelves,  how  could  the  Lord's  adopting  them 
make  them  become  so?  Surely  the  relisoning  is  as  pitiable 
as  much  of  what  we  have  elsewhere  had  upon  the  same 

side^ 

But  he  still  goes  on: 

"  This  parable  of  the  rich  man  and  Lazanis  is  a  supplement 
to  that  at  the  beginning?  of  the  el)Hi)t."r.  of  thf  rich  man  and  his 
steward,  both  being  designed  to  enforce  ihv  piercing  tmth,  that 
'that  which  is  highly  esteemed  among  men  is  an  abomination  m 
the  sight  of  God,'  ver.  15,  tlie  connecting  link  between  the  two. 
In  regard  to  the  first  parable,  human  cmft  had  instituted  the 
idea  that  a  welcome  to  the  '  (>vorlasting  habitations '  was  to  be 
secured  by  means  of  the  friendship  of  'unrighteous  mammon,' 
or  worldly  riches  ;  palpably  in  opposition  to  the  principle  of  ver. 

15;  but  by  mentioning  the  incident  of  the  unjust  steward,  the 
^  Lord  showed  that,  though  man  might  commend  bis  act,  it  is 
divinely  deemed  unrighteous  still.'" 

And  this  is  exposition  of  Scripture!  ^- Me- placed  the  rich 
man  in   the  flame,  and   the  begL'ar  in   Abrahnm's  bosom. 
thereby  proving  that  a,  position  in  the  kingdom  of  heaven 
could    not    be    purchased     by    '  unrighteous    mammon.' " 
Doubtless  it  could  not  ;  but  was  it  not  just  h\-  not  having    . 
made  himself  frimd^   of  the'  unrighteous    mammon    that 
placed  the  rich'man  in  the  tlame  V     Who  can  deny  or  doubt 
it?    And  who  can  suppose  that  solemn  exhortation.   '  T  say 
unto  you,  make  to  yourselves  friends  of  the  mammon  of  un- 
righteousness," with   the  questions    following:  "If,  there- 
fore, ye  have  not  been  faithful  in  the  unrighteous  mammon,  » 
who  will  commit  to  your  trust  the  true  riches,"  etc.,  to  be  the 
,.    adoption  of  error?    If  General  Goodwyn  cannot  reconcile     , 
this  with  the  gospel,  he  is  ignorant  of  the  blessed  fact,  that 
the  gospel  in  no  wise  sets  aside  the   eternal  principles  of 
right  and  wrong,  but  reaffirms  them  all.     True,  riches  will    - 
i  not  purchase  heaven,  nor  could  aught  save  the  Redeemer's 

bIftHRfid  work.  True,  eternal  life  is  God's  gift,  not  man's 
purchase  or  his  work.  Vet  shall  '■  they  that  have  done  good 
come  forth  unto  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that  have    ^ 


■i  H, 


mm 


'w*' 


(HJNH(:iOUS5fi:SS  aftkii  dkath. 


109 


done  evil  unto  the  resurrection  of  damnation."  That  "we 
are  His  workmanship,  created  iu  Christ  Jesus  wito  r/ood 
works''  is  the  connecting  trutli  that  puts  all  in  its  place  and 
explains  all. 

I  need  not  then  repeat  what  I  have  said  already  as  to  the 
scope  of  these  parables,  nor  follow  the  argument  further 
with  General  Goodwyn.  We  shall  only  finally  examine 
Mr.  Constable's  treatment  of  this  sul»ject  in  his  volume  dn 
Hades,  already -so  largely  quoted. 

He,  too,  asserts  that  'in  the  words  of  Christ,  hades  is 
identified  with  the  grave,  and  the  dead  in  hades  are  repre- 
sented as  alive  and  speaking."  This  we  reserve  for  future 
consideration.  He  begins  the  argument  with  a /significant 
Statement  that,  if  this  parable  "could  be  truly  shown  to 
teach  their  [the  non-extinction]  views,  the  only  effect  would 
be  that  of  establishing  a  contradiction  between  one  part  of 
Scripture  and  another,  or  of  ajfbrdhui  reason  to  think  th^_^ 
this  parable  of  Lazarus,  drspife  the  authdrittj  of  mannscriptd;' 
formed  no  part  of  the  original  Gospel  of  St.  Luke."  (!) 

He  begins  by  asserting,  what  I  shall  not  question  at  all, 
that   this   story  is  a   parable.     He   contends    that  on   this 
account   *'  the   entire    tale   may  be   fictitious."     But,  while 
talking  as  usual  freely  ^f  Platortism,  he  ignores  the  fact  so 
fully  allowed  by  others,  and  so  impossible  to  be  denied,  that 
it  adopts  (and,  the  argument  is,  sanctions)  the  belief  of  the 
Pharisees.     This   plainly  puts  it    on  ground  different  alto- 
gether from  those  Mr.   C.  appeals  to,  wherein  "the  trees 
engage   in   political   discourse,"    etc.       Even    this   i^ort  of 
representation  we  never  find  the  Lord  using  in  His  parables, 
that  I  am  aware.     But  ceiflLly  He  never^opted  the  su- 
perstition^ He  condemned,  nor  made  the  ti^cutions  of  men 
the  basis  of  His^wn  authoritati"^e  teachin^f.     This  plain  dig- 
tinction  Mr.  Constable  seems  never  to  have  thought  of,  and 
of  course  has  not  noticed  it.    In  reality  it  takes  the  ground 
from  underneath  his  feet.     Not  only  is  the  argument  quite 
unanswerable,  that  the  Lord  eotdd  not  have  employed  false- 


hood  ja.8,the  vehicle  of  truth  (and  without  even  a  hint  as  to 


■i'i  ■ 


1^ 


i'i 


h-M 


i    ;■■ 


110         FACTS  A KD  THEORIES  AS  TO  A   FUTrRE  STATI. 

its  being  false),  but  that  also  the  very  moral  of  the  tale  !• 
this,  "And  1  say  unto  you,  Make  to  yourHelves  friends  of 
the  mammon  of  unrighteousness :  that  when  ye  fail,  they 
may  receive  you  into  everlasting  habitations. '  This  is  the 
rich  man's  condemnation  :  his  riches  were  his  accusers  now, 
and  not  his  friends.  lie  had  received  his  goo<l  things,  taken 
his  portion  in  a  world  that  passeth  away.  Now  he  was  tor- 
mented. And  observe  how  precisely  the  language  accords 
with  this:  it  is  '*  when  ye  fail  " — that  is,  of  course,  f/ie  ;  not 
when  you  are  raised  as  Mr.  Constable  must  read  it ;  no,  but 
that  "WHEN  YE  FAIL,  they  may  receive  you  into  evi»-- 
lasting  habitations."  The  precise  doctrine  is  there,  given  in 
plain  words  and  not  parable  at  all,  and  illustrating  and  con- 
firming the  parable.  , 

We  might  leave  Mr.  Constables  argument  h(!re,  but  there 
is  one  other  point,  insisted  on  already  both  by  Leask  and 
Goodwyn,  to  which  we  must  reply  before  we  dose.  ,Mr. 
Constable  supposes — 

"  that  Christ,  for  the  jnirpose  of  his  parable,  nntedatcs  it.  What 
will  really^happea  to  such  men  us  Div^  and  La/arus  when  they 
axe  raised  up  at  the  resurrection,  Ho  ^apposes  to  happen  to  them 
in  Hades  before  the  resurrection  ;  and  He  consequently  supposes 
them  to  be  aUvo  in  this  Had^  state,  and  capable  of,  feeling, 
speech,  etc.  .  .  In  His  expianation  of  parable  upon  parable  He 
has  Himself  explained  that  it  is  m)t  until  the  '  tiioo  of  t^e  harvest,' 
until  '  the  end  of  the  world  'or  age,  that  His  people  are  gathered 
into  His  bam  and  shine  as  the  sun,  .vhile  the  wicked  are  sent  as 
taxes  to  the  burning.  Over  *ind  over  He  has  told  us  that  Gehenna, 
and  not  Etades,  is  the  place  of  torment.  .  ,  .  We  are  therefore  not 
merdy  justified,  'but  absolutely  required  by  Scripture  to  hold 
that  our  Lord  iq.  this  parable  antedates  it  in  timr-,  a  liberty  which 
the  nature  and  character  of  parabolical  di.sconrse  fully  entitled 
Him  to  do."  '  -~i 

Now  the  passage  ^^eJiave  just  quoted  from  the  chapter 
before  us^  and  manifestly  connected  with  t\  e  parable  in 
question,  affirms  th^  Opposite  of  this:  ''  that  when  ye  fail. 


they  may  receive  you  into  everlasting  habitations."     This 
shows  that  lit  death  we  are  received,  and  that  there  is  no 


-f^ 


ti 


CONSClOUaNESS   AFTER   DEATH. 


Ill 


1«  it 
s  of 
they 
I  the    -/ 


-f^ 


antedatiug.     Doubtless  it  is  after  the  judgment,  <,t  works, 
and  therefore  after  resurrection,  that  the  exact  recompense 
is  given,  the  exact  measure  of  punishment  is  meted  out. 
m  in  the  meanwliile  the  suirits  of  the  lost  are  -  spirits  m 
vruoa''   (1    l^'t.   iii.    19),  witK  no  uncertahity  as  to  their 
being  lost,  any  more  than  he  who,  "ab^M.t  from  the  body, 
is  "present  with  the  Lord,"  is  uncertain  of  his  own  salva- 
tion.    Even  now  are  we  privileged   to  know  the  latter  it 
really  ours  (1  John  v.  18).     And  "  the  angels  who  sinned 
referred  to  by  the  apostle  Peter,  though  -reserved  unto 
mdgment"   are   yet  "  delivered   into   chains  ot    darkness, 
while  waiting  for  it  ('2  Peter  ii.  4).     Similarly  the  "  host  of 
the  high  ones"  and  "the  kings   of  the   earth      "shall  be 
gathered  together  as  prisoners  are  gathered  in  the  pit,  and 
shall  be  shut  up  in  the  prison,"  ath'r  a   whole  millennium 
"to  be  visited"  and  Judged.     (See  Isa.   xxiv.  21-23,  and 
compare  Kev.  xix.  l9-xx.  3,  etc.)  -   . 

Then  it  is  a  false  application  Mr.  Constable  makes  of  the 
parables  of  the  tares  and/wheat .     For  these  "  tar^s  "  are^men 
alixe  "  in  the  field,"  the  world,  when  the  Lord  comes,  and  not 
dead  men  at  all.     So  exactly  with  the  ''  wheat."    The  Lord 
is  speaking  of  the  clearing  of  the  field  in  the  day  of  harvest, 
and  not  at  all  of  resurrection  eten.     Nay  more,  the  very 
parable  itself  is  deciuw  arjamst  his  whole  argument.     For 
the  tares  gathered  and  cast  in  the  tire  are  so  dealt  with  when 
the  Eord  appears,  before  the  millennium,  and  therefore  a 
thousand  years  before  the  resurrection  and  judgment  of  the 
wicked  at  the  great  white  throne.     Let  any  one  compare 
Rev.  xix.,  XX.,  and  sec  if  it  be  not  so. 

Again  the  Lord  does  say  that  there  is  torment  in  Gehenna ; 
but  he  does  not  say,  that  in  Hades  there  is  none.  The 
Scripture  Mr.  Constable  refers  to  is  conclusively  against 
him.  The  plain.and  simple  impression  which  any  one  would 
receive  from  the  first  hearing  of  the  parable,  becomes  only 
the  more  indisputably  correct,  the  more  we  examme  it. 
Thei-*^  is  the  harmony  and  consistency  of  truth  innt,  and 


this  the  arguments  of  its  opposers  only  the  more  bring  out. 


iif* 


.i!| 
.:!i 


I  -  . 

HL'         FAITS  AM»  THi;uKIK.>>  Af  TO  A  FUTUUK  STATE. 


^. 


t 


B^A* 


^^i- 


# 


■i;., 


m 


} : 


-•  1  ■  ■ 

Mi 


CHAPTEli  XII. 


cons<mi)i:h.\ess  aftek  dkatji.  ...  2. 


'••«.'# 


T\ 


We  liave  seeu  then  the  LoiUatKiiniuj^  the  doctrine  of  the 
Pharisees  as  to  conscious  existence  ip  happiness  or  misery 
in  the  intermediate  state.  Xi^a  shall  now  pa.ss  on  to  a  passage 
M'hich  sliows  how  lar  the  discijjle»Jf  the  Lord  had  imbfbed 
the  Pharisaic,  or  let  us  rather  b^N-,  the  Scripture  doctrine, 
with  whidi  the  Pharisaic  was  identical.  Foe  we  read  that 
when,  alter  His  resurrection,  they  were  gathered  together, 
"  Jesus  Himself  stood  in  the  midst  of  them,  and  saith  mito 
Ihem,  Peace  be  unto  you.  But  they  were  terrified  and 
affrighted,  atuf  i<iij>jn>ff  d  tliot  tiny  had .s( r/l  a  sj,ir'd.  And 
He  siilp'unto  thein,  Why  are  ye  troubled,  and  why  do 
thoughts  arise  in  your  hearts  'i    Behold  my  hands  a||il  ms 


feet,  that  it  is  I  myself:  handle  ub  and  see;  tor 

e  see  me  have  "  (L 


h^th  not  llesli  and  bones,  as  ye 


anything^ 
spirit  thei 
gardener, 
taken  IliniJ 


Noi,V,^l|cre   it  is  i)lain  they  recognized   tlK»  form  of  the 
Lord,  fqli^gk^  none  of  the  appearances  to  them  do  we  find 
^"'*'  tet^makc  them  think  otherwise  it  was  a 
^|f  !Mag€alene  had  KUj>jK)8ed  Him  the 
Fon  the^|feLy^.to  Emmaus  just  before  had 
i^ordinaryTiian.     Moreover,  they  had  just, 
come  among  the  other  disciples,  and  .foinid  them  "saying/ 
The-^Lord  is  risen  indee<l,  and  hath  appeared  mito  Simon." 
Then,  while  they  Avere  gjiving  their   own   account,  "Jesus 
Himself  stood  in  the  midst,"     It  was  this  sudden  appear- 
ance,^the  <loor  being  shut,  that  staggered  tliem.     They  did  , 
not  doubt  who  it  was,  nor,  luid  they  doubted,  would  hamlltn(f 
Him  have'given  them  that  knowledge.     The  Loj-d  does  not  ' 
need  to  name  Himself,  nor  do  it. — He  does  not  say,  "  It  in  I, 
.7f'«»/.s,"  but  "it  is  T,  wry.sv//;"  using  that  common  languaifc 


:4 


1  .-i 


'';Vl 


^. 


■<$ 


T.% 


w- 


'J 
I 


^ 


spirits/'     But  thiH  is,  not  tlu^  questiou,  but  whether  it  w»8 
Ho  Himself  in  bodilv  i)iest'nce,  or  as  a  Hpirit.     The  whok? 
,    circumstauces  and  tlie  Loril'#»  wonls  assure  us  crt  this. 

*         Upon  the  autliorlty  of  "some  ancient  31SS.^  of  Luke,^ 
Uoherts  would  substitute  " /^'/<////«.s//t(/ "  i'or  pneUnm  in  ver| 
37,  and  then,  without  /<//// authority,   make  y>yit'«//ta  mean! 
phantasma   in    the   liOth    verse.       Having  thus    oonverted* 
"  spirit "  into  "  piumloin,''  hv  wouUl  mako  the  whole  a  ques- 
tion of  "  reality  or  of  spet-tral  illusion." 

But  Mr.  11.  can  find  no*  such  meaning  for  "pneuma"  in 

,>>Ahe  New  Testament  or  in  t\ie  Greek  language  anywhere, 
as  "phantom"  or  "'•^)ectral  illusion/'  and  he  must  know  he. 
cannot.  Hence  his  anxiety  to  import  "  phantasma "  into 
ver.  37,  a  reading  unanimously  rejected  by  every  editor  of 
the  Greek  that  I  am  acciuaiiited  with,  and  disproved  by  the 
fact  of  its  being  nnquestioiiably  jmeiima  in  the  39th  :  for  if 
their  thought  had  been  that  it  was  a  mere  illusion  that  they 
saw,  the  Lord  would  not  have  answered  it  by  saying,  "a 
spirit,^''  etc. 

It  was  not  with  them  then  a  question  of  illusion  or  reality, 
but  of  bodily  w  spiritual  inesence.  Mr.  R.  objects  that  the 
Lord  says,  "It  is  I  niyself,"  i^nd  that  His  spirit,  according 
to  the  common  belief,  wouhl  have  been  Hlniself.  But  all 
ilepends  upon  the  point  of  view.  To  those  who  had  had  Him 
*as  th^living  man  among  them,  the  mere  visit  of  Hisdepart- 

>    ed  spirit  would  not  have  been  "  Himself,"  for  it  is  no  question 


of, .metaphysical  accuracy,  but  of  heart,  to  which  the  Lor<i 
responds.     They  saw  Him,  did  not  believe  that  it  could  be 


t^ 


\  4 


jii 


1% 


&> 


ir 


^  r^V:J\''i'- 


■li'^'^'^- 


•■,«;(.    V." 
■«>■„■■>■ 


kr 


•fil 


114         FACTS  AND  THE()B1E«  AS.TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

alivins  mau'come  among  them  in  that  mysterious  way, 
therefore  thought  they  saw  a  spirit;  to  which  He  answer, 
by  bidding'  them  prove  that  He  had  tlesh  and  bones.  Ihus 
it  was  not  what  wouUl  have  been  the  evidence  ot  the  tri- 
ulhph  of  death  i.verHim,  but  what  their  hearts   would  call 

BurCere  then  it  is  very  plain  tha|,  the  disciples  ot  the 
Lord  were  us  to  this  point  Pharisees,  or  Platonists,  it  you 
will.  And:,4t  is  as  plaui  that,  instead  of  checking  their 
thou^'hts  /is  superstitious  fancies,  He  ^appeals  instead  to 
the  bodilessness  of  a  >' spirit,"  and  His"6wn  Hesh  and  bones. 
Xor-is  there  -  parable"  to  justify  (as  tli^y  say  elsi^where)  the 
empl6vnu..nt  of  fictitious  speecli."  The  fav(,rite.  arguments 
fall  here  like  broken  arrows  from  the  panoply  of  truth. 

How  common  a  um-  of  ,th«  word  "  spirit "  this  is,  we  may 
see  by  ll»e  in.spired  statement  of  the  Jewish  views  m  Acts 
xxiii   8-  '"For  the  Sadducees  say  that  there  is  no  resurrec- 
tion, 'neifhr  ^i^A  „n,'  .y>(,v7 ;    but   the    Pharisees   confess 
holhr     Thero  a.j:ain   the  word  "  spirit"  is   takim  as  ordi- 
narily applvin-  (as  our  word  "ghost /'which  is  equivalent, 
docs*  now)"  to    the    spirits    of  men    apart,    froin   the  body. 
Angels  are  given  as  another  class.      And  thi'  context  con- 
fifnTs    this:     for    P:ml    ht'iug  called  in   (pieslion  about  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus,  iiad    declared  himself  a   Pharisee,  a 
believer  in   ivsurrectioii ;     and   hereupon  the    council    was 
divided,  ''and  then;  arose  a  great  cry;  and  the  scribes  that 
were  of  the   Pharisees'  part  arose  and  strove,  saying,   We 
.find  no  evilin  this  man,  but  if  a   sp\nt   or  an  awjd  hath 
spoken  tohim,  let  us  not  fight  ngi^nst  God."     Agahist  this 
passage  Mr.  Storrs'  criticism  on  Luke  xxiv.  .'VJ  falls  pointless. 
"  Angels  are  spirits,'  says  he,  "  but  have  not  a  b.ody  of  flesh 
and  bones."  "  'But  in  these  two  last  rpiotc^d  passages,  and  m 
identified  t>H(h  th:  Phansi'.o^'  helief  (the  nature  of  which  all 
admit),  angels  are  named  as  a  separate  class  of  beings  from 
^    these^spirits  spok^i  of,— "  if  a  spirit  or  an  angel."     In  a 
Pharisee's  mouth  even  our  oi)ponents  allow  the  meaning  of 
such  words.    And  with  their  belief  Paul  links  himself.    For 


'I 


CONSCIOITSNESS  AFTER   DEATH. 


115 


having  declared  himself  a  Pharisee,  and  called  in  question 
as  to  one  point  of  a  Pharisee's  belief,  the  resurrection  of  the 
dead,  it  is  added  as  showing  the  points  in  which  their  faith 
coincided  with  the  Christian's  :  '^''for  the  Sadducees  say  that 
there  is  no  resurrection,  neither  ongel  XOR  spirit  ;  but  the 
Pharisees  confes';,  both."  The  language  of  the  inspired 
writer  here  shows  his  own  consent  with  this  doctrine  :  "  the 
Pharisees  coiifeH.-i  (or  acknowledge)  both.  When  1  speak  of 
"acknowledging''  a  thing,  I  plainly  suppose  it  true,  what  is 
acknowledged.  And  thus  in  these  matters  the  Pharisaic 
and  the  Christian  faith  are  one.* 

f  I  take  tbo  light  this  gives  me,  how  plain  and  simple  it 
makes  sugb  passages  as  the  Lord's  words  to  the  dying  thief, 
for  instance  :  '' To-day "shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise.'" 
Or  Stephen's  piayor in  the  midst  of  the  stones  of  his  ene- 
mies :  "  Lord  Jesus,    receive   my   spii*it."t     Or  "  the  spirit 

*  Roberts  says,  "  We  prefer  to  let  Mr,  Grant"  have  the  full  benefit  of  - 
this.    His  inference  that  Luke  endorses  their  opinion  is  too  unsubstantial 
to  call   for  serious   arcjumentation."     Be  it   sf».  but  many  will  judge 
differently,  and  of  the  motive  also  for  declining  argument.     Paul's  "  I 
am  a  Pharisee,"  he  passes  OTer  entirely. 

t  Would  it  be  believed  that  in  the  "  Bible  v/h  Tradition  "  it  is  asserted 
the  "  grammar  of  the  text  charges  the  saying.  Lord  .Jesus  receive  my 
spirit,  upon  the  nicked  .Jews,  and  aftef wards  records  what  Stephen 
said  and  did  "  (2d  ed..  p.  98).  This  is  from  people  who  appeal  aot 
only  to  Greek  and  Hel)rew,  but  to  Syriac,  and  what  not ;  and  yet  theV 
assert  what  anV  sfiutoiboy  in  Greek  could  contradict.  For  the  words 
translated  "  calling  'iii)on  and  saying  "  are  in  the  singular- number,  and 
could  not  poss;'>JT  apply  to  the  Jew.s,  or  to  any  but  Stephen  himself, 
'  Z.  Campbell  ("  Age  of  Gospel  Light,"  p.  44)  concurs  with  this  : 
"  Now  it  seeni.s  it  was  the  same  fJiey  that  ran  upon  kira,  and  calling 
upon  God.  .  .  .  But  it  may  bo  asked,  why  the  Jews  should  say,  Lord 
Jesus,  receive  my  spirit  ?  Only  by  mocking  the  confidence  of  Stephen 
in  the  Saviour."  . 

In  the  6th  ed.  of  Ellis  ari'i  Head's  book  just  referred  to  (" Bible  vs. 
TradHion,"  p.  90),  they  give  anoth^p^-yeri^ion  of  the  passage,  equally  re- 
markable for  learning  ;  speaking  of  the  word  translated  "  receive,"  they 
say,  "  Dexia  means  the  rifjht,  cheir,  hand,  being  understood ;  meta 
phorically  it  means  assistance,  aid,  strength,  courage, and  is  equal  to 
the  expression.  Cnrd  Jesus,  stretigthen  my  spirit,  or  nerve  me  up  to 


"*%£**-. 


•,!^ 


'1 


H' 


V: 


116        FXOTS  AN..  ™K0K.|  ,VS  TO  A   Ff XUBB  SIATF.. 

sage  that  speakB  (Heb.  x,,.  -J)  "t  ;,.,„„ection,  which 

rip  h.r:h:;connecr,„„..     Mea,nv„-,>..  ,  , o  s-e 

"tp'^lT^t-a^occr,  a  —n,  which  has  nat^y 

— "  .7        .    .ommon  Om-k    w..r<l,  r^^^r^  rightly  iranslatpcl 

endurance."     Here   a   mmmon     .u    "^  .<  nght  (haml)/' 

receive  (a  verb),  is  mistaken  tor  tl,.  '"/;;',. ^;=^;,.,;.,  ;,,  f.Uv  the 
Whether  the  wickedness  ^-^P^^'-^'\^\,^l,  ,,l  Annihilationist 
wickedness.I  leave  others  to   decule.     l.u. 

leader^.  ..  .,«rtr»  the  thief  is  ther'efore  reserved 

,„  thi..     Hi>  remark,  as  to  ^^'V^'""^  J  .  ,„  ,„  spe„k.  irMSure 

.h.l  Steph«.-»  prayer  mean,  thai  "  •  -"^"J^^  ';,  „^  ,„^„,„  .^t  per. 
to  spirit  or  life  for  him,  h,»  J'-"-™"  "^^  f;^' ' .,  „„,..  than  -  hrea.h 
toh."    Here  il  is  more  convenient  fo.  ''^ '";»>        „  ..  ,„  „,„»- 

■„iK"anntoa.„>  '•"«  "^ -^.^^rt  ;:,r:  Xwhere.l,  an 

i,  to  treasure  up  .hi,  ^T"''' '"'I'^J:';^^,,,  „.Rher  ••  life  •  nor 
..  S;„-rtf,of  jus.  men,  on  .*' "  '"^^.^j.^^.^,,,  „,.„,  t„  l,im,e,f 
..  energy,"  but  ■■ .».«..--  M^  «  ;,";^  ^^_^  ,^^  ^„  „„„„,..,  s„ 
,hatA>.mean,ng  of  sp.,  1  ^.^^  ^^  of  just  men  made  perfect,"-n..- 
'<  we  are  come  to.   .   .the«"iic.  ,'L  tV,^  heavenly  citv,  the  New 

,.,  the  conneetion.  -  .■■  Mo"-  ^-■-'  ;;''':,\;'  ,o  the  »enera, 
.lerusalem.  and  to  an  innnmeraWe  .  ompan  ,  ^^        ^^^, 

,,.embly  and  chnroh  of  the  «-"'''";•;',?,'";;;,  ...'.peaks  to  us 
to  the  «»««■««-« of  iust  men  ™-<l« J'*;'.  ,JX  in  which  both  the 
„f  that  future,  which  is  yet  so  mmeAM'''''  f»^  J.       ,  ..  „, 

chur"h  of  the  firstborn  finds  tt,  completeness,  --i^^'  ^^  ,,,„ 

"l*"*-^*'"'™f,.>t^t  ndf"  *em  tbLh.ii  be  attained  in 
not  be  made  perfect.      For  us  ana  i  according  to  our  ^'iew  (a 

the  resurrection  day  •,  and  there  ,s  no  anomaly  acco  g  ^^  ^^^^^^^^  „ 
...  ^ir.1.  so  poorly  under^a^s^ahn^^^^^ 


by  getting  back  again  the  horiy,  tor  ,... 
old  created  and  ordaii»ed 


^ 


,i!    ■ 


•  ■} 


H- 


coNsoiousisrESS  abteU  death: 


117 


pas- 

1 

men     ^ 

1 

jrhich 

1 

•will 

' 

some 

-1 

iirally 
bject. 

y  cor- 

:-^:r 

But  if 

imatic 

inslatpd 

!).•' 

oily  the 

lationist 

reserved 

e  thinks 

treasure 

that  per- 

"  breath 

to  those 

■re,  is   an 

And  Gofl 

life  ■'  nor 
>  himself 
n<l.')     So 
?ct,"— no- 
,  the  New 
le  general 
of  all,  and 
eaks  to  us 
I  both  the 
men  "  of 
nt  us  shall 
ittained  in 
3ur  view  (a 
perfected  " 
1  it  was  of 


expression  meaning  *  worth  my  while '],  yet  what  I  shall 
choose  I  wot  not.  For  I  am  in  a  strait  betwixt  two,  having 
a  desire  to  depart  and  be  with  Christ,  which  is  far  better ; 
nevertheless  to  abide  in  the  flesli  is  more  needful  for  you." 

The  passage  is  simple  enough,  and  would  scarcely  seem  to 
need  any  explanation.  But  for  the  sake  of  distinctly  review- 
ing the  objections  made,  I  shall  divide  it  into  its  parts,  and 
look  at  each  part  separately. 

.^  (1.)  In  the  first  place,  to  the  apostle,  the  object  of  his  life 
was  Christ,  and  to  die  was  gain.  This  is  the  plain  meaning. 
Nevertheless  it  is  denied.  "Do  you  ask,"  say  Ellis  and 
Read,  ".how  then  it  would  be  gain  (f»  Paul  to  die?  Paul 
does  not  say  it  would  be  gain  to  him.  Fill  up  the  ellipsis 
according  to  grammatical  laws  :  '  For  me  to  live  will  be 
gain  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  for  Christ  will  at  all  events  be 
magnified  in  my  body,  whether  by  my  life  or  by  my  death. 
And  for  me  to  die  is  gain  to  the  cause  of  Christ,  for  Christ 
will  be  magnified  in  my  body,  whether  I  die  or  live.'  If 
you  insist  that  it  would  be  gain  to  Paul  to  die,  we  reply, 
He  does  not  say  so,  and  if  it  would  bo  gain  to  him  person- 
ally, then  he  would  not. be  in  perplexity  which  to  chdose."* 
Mrl  Hudson  spe,aks  similarly,  though  more  cautiously.  So 
also  Dr.  Field. 

But  the  interpreta^tion  is  not  admissible.  For  the  fuoi 
yap  (for  to  me)  standing  at  the  commencement  of  the  sen- 
tence is  necessarily  related  to  both  clauses  of  it :  "  to  me  to 
live  is  Christ,  and  (to  me)  to  die  is  gain."  Nor  does  he  say, 
"  to  me  to  live  is  gain  to  the  cause  of  Christ "  at  all,  but  to 
me  to  live  is  Christ,  Christ  is  the  object  of  my  life.  And 
when  he  comes  to  speak  of  death  being  gain,  he  never  says, 
^'to  the  cause  of  Christ"  at  all,  but  '•  (to  me)  to  die  is 
gain."  I  need  not  comment  upon  the  remark  that  "  if  it 
would  be  gain  to  him  personally,  he  would  not  be  in  per- 
plexity  which  to  choose."  Of  that  people  must  judge  for 
themselves,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  Christian  spirit  which 
'  i\  shows.     The  apostle  goes  on  to  say  : 


'•*--■ 


*  Bible  vs.  Tradition,  pp.  13'.»,  140. 


I  i 


!■< 


■    I  1 


/  : 


,18         F.CTS  AKI.  THee«.ES  A«  10  A  .".HE  STATE. 

■      (2.)  ..  Yet  what  I  shall  choo«e  I  wot  not.  for  I  am  >n  . 

strait  hetwixt  t  wo:"         ^^  ^  ^  ^  ^^^^  ^       gai„  t„ 

IB  it  not  pla.n  that  if  ".»""^J^''     :(      ,;       ,,eath  or  life; 

him,  that  he  was  in  a  -^^f'TT^  "hey  were  equally  in- 
„„  becaa»e,  a«  Kllis  and  Road  -^^^  J^  ^^^^  „f \,ei„g  i„ 

.  .liUerent  to  him,"-.1.at  would  '«  ^     ^^^  ,,;^  I.,,,,^  because 
a  »«ra,7  betwixt  two  equaily  md.ffm^«^^  . 

.  itwasaauesr,onofchoos.n.l.    ownmte^^^^^^ 
saints,  as  he  go,s  on  to  UU  u^:  ^  ^^.,,^^  ^^^^      _ 

have  another  version  of  .t.       H'*  m^  .  ,^.,.,, 

that  Paul  possessed  an  -™-  /''^J;;,;  ,w„  indifferent 
thing  was  obviously  -*«-,-,„'  1,^  '^Z^,^^^',  and  going 

ones,  and  f  ^-f"";!""  ',,  ^?  n"  or  death  was  one  of  .the 
immediately  to  Christ,  for  ">""-,      referable  to  life  as 

things  that  ho  did  not  ^«-";      ;"  ,'^>,  P,,,  „i„g  was  '  far 
to  decide  his  chou-e.     Lut  ;  -"'  ^       ,.,f    better  than- 

..better.'    Better  '»'»"  ^^''"V;  J  ,  TAr*/.'-"'/ toim/" 

death ;  therefore  .fo-'A  -«'■'  ''^~    I'be  apostle  says. 
ThisisremWkahlereason,n,cna,n    .        J^  ^^^  ,^^, 

.■I  am  in  a  strait  ''otwixt  two    •  t  ■;  [  am  in 

between  the  two,  ^^•'^<^»  '.\^"r' ,,f  "j^er  ■  «-.^«-f/,*«.s  "- 
,       and  he  with  Christ,  which   «     "    '  ^^      ;,^  ;,  „„,«  „„«!- 

tere  is  the  rtrtTlih^^ de  ^^  w:.,dd  he  his  gain.and 

/W/Vy"-"    ^'''''.f    ,rwweenA«"!<-"  gai"='°<i  ''*''• 
:  heknewit.thestrai    -;^;;;:  Viff.rentS«  o/*^,  b«t 

?eS  t^andMil^lATa..  and  did  not  .now  whi^to^ 
-"^W  was  no  third  thing  at  all 't":"f  :.'':r:^ 


his  strait  on 


si"t;-rt'ss:«"— 


r* 


CONSCIOUSNESS    AFTEK   DEATH. 


119 


n  in  a 

;ain  to 
ir  life; 
tlly  in- 
;ing  in 
ecause 
of  the 
quoted 
I  thing 
8  thivti 
liffereut 
1  going 
B  of  the 

0  life  as 
tvas  'fal- 
ter than 

St  le  pays, 
;ay  these 
u  I  am  in  - 
says  the 
Kllis  and* 

1  Never- 
ceive  that 
perplexity 

to  depart 
ihfjpss  " — 
more  m&d- 
is  gain,  and 
and  other 
either,  but 
w  which  to 


Q> 


a  deafiTe  to 
the  one 


P 


an 


them,  was  just  his  difficulty  on  the  other.  And  thus  "de- 
parting and  being  with  Clirist  '  is  fixed  to  mean  his  dying  ; 
just  as  his  '*  abiding  in  the  ilesh  '  is  fixed  to  mean  his //y</J,v. 

(3.)  But  here  a  great  tumult  is  raise<l,  and  much  knowledge 
of  Greek  is  endeavored  to  be  shown  in  letting  us  know  that 
T  it  dyaXv.^yai,  does  not4nean  "  to  depart "  at  all.     So  Messrs. 
Hudson,  Roberts,  Ellis  and  Read,  would  all  have  it,  "  having 
a  desire  for    iiiE  itmuiOTlNO   and  being  with  Christ,"'  suj; 
posing  it  to  r(!fer  to  Christ's  returning.     The  latter  Writers 
go  on  even  to  suppose  that  it  was  better  for  the  Philippians 
that  Christ  shonM  not  come,  and  that  so  Paul  should  abide 
in  the  flesh.      Umvevt  r,  .1  is  at  least  a  little  unfortunate  for 
their  theory,  that  the  substantive  ^^  analuais'"   (dydXvdi'i) 
derived  from  the   verb  "  analuo  "  (ai-trAi  oj)  is  used  by  Paul 
in  2  Tim.  iv.  (5,  undoubtedly  for  his  death  :  "  I  am  now  ready 
to  be  offered,  and  the  time  of  nu/  DFiPAKTUiiE  is  at  hand. 
I  have  fought  a  good  fight,  I  have"  finished  my  course,"  etc. 
If  it  be  departure   tliere,  and  death,  why  cannot  it  be   so 
where,  as  we  have  seen,  the  ('ontext  fixes  it  down  to  apply 
to  dpath  ?    Anil  it  i^  true  that  it  sometimes  means  "return,' 
but  not  soolYenas  '  depart,"  so  that  an  Anuihilationist  alone 
could   tell  US"  why  it  should  be  so  translated   here.     The 
leason  being  only  in  the  exigencies  of  a  theory,  which  must 
bend  Scripture  to   its  need,  or  be  convicted  of  open  oppo- 
sition to  it. 

Mr.  Ro])erts  is  now  willing,  however,  to  accept  the  ordi- 
nary rendering.  He  says,  "This  understanding  of  Paul's 
words  wotild  not  be  affected  by  the  act'ei)tanc(;  of  the 
ciommon  version  .  .  .  for  to  die  and  be  with  Christ  are  in- 
stantly consecpiential  incidents  to  the  consciousness  of  the 
man  who  dies."  But  that  is  not  (juite  all  wo  have  to  con- 
sider. Is  it  just  the  same  to  the  conisciousness  of  the  man 
that  //fe.s"  ?  Would  a  fiction  of  this  kind  render  attractive 
in  the  eyes  of  such  a  one  as  Paul,  does  Mi*.  Roberts  think, 
what  in  reality  would  be  "to  depart  into  forget  fulness,  and 
be  w^ith  Christ  when  he  woke  up  "  ?  The  "  gain  "  of  dleath 
would-  be    torgetfulness :    "better    by   far"    than   present 


needfiil  for 


V,.   V:;- 


I!  t 


120  KAiTS  ASUTHKOKIRS  ASTO  A    FITUHKST.VTK. 

,tellow«hij.    >vitb   Christ.  an-V  joy  in  GoJ,  himI    .nagnifying 
Christ  bv  t^ervii*' . such  as"liis!  .      ,.     ,     « 

Mr.  Constable  is  ot:^no  mind   with   RuWrts  m  Um  last 
,  .    .         view  ofthe  passage.  "^^  To  depart,'-  he  says,  "means  d^«^ 

I  ,  less  to  die,  and  to   be  with  Christ  means   doubUess   the     ^ 

.  ^         ijlorified  .tate  at  resurrection.     They  are  spoken  of  here  as 
■  dosely  co.u.ected,  as  in  t^ict  synchronal,  frouaimt  aoctrme  of 
'         the  sleep   of  the    intermediate  state   which  Paul  so  often 
taiiirht  [y]  To  depart  frmnl  life  and  die  would  be,  he  knew,  to 
'    beillowod  at  once.by  the  trumpet  calling  him  to, arise  and 
be  with  liis  Lord ;  for  tifne  A^^uld  in  the  actual  interval,  how- 
ever Ions,  between  dying  and  rising,  be  annihilat^a  lor  him 
who  slept."     How  strangely  it  sound,  to  hear  the, aiftcrent 
^         '  reports  of  that   land  oi'  for i^et fulness,  which   these   writers 
give  us  at  difterent  times.     Who  would  think  that  this  was 
■  JoVs  place  of<larkness  and  dn^order  which  his  s6ulcontem-  M 

V  plated^with  so  little  desired  yet  Job  too  1^-^^" 
Redeemer  live<l,  ami  expected  to  se.  Him  stand  m  the  lattei 
day  upon  the  earth.     If  the  quiet  oblivion  of  sleep  al«ne  was 
.      belween  him  and  that  day,  why  not  more  of  Paul's  spirit  as 
to  if'     The  light  had' soml^how   shone  into  that  place  of 
glooin for  Paul.  .V<...^/^/ merely  would  have  been  the  same  ^ 
k        for  each,  and  not  light  nor  darkness,  but  noneiitity  .     Mr. 
^       Cbnstable  lias  not  ^he  solution  of  this  enigma  plamlj .    How- 
ever,  I  have  ansxtef^d  him  before  and  independently. 
But  he  adds-— 

'  .  .  witli  Clirist  ■  in  ,.  rfat,.  <.(  lif.',  Wvolvs  a  cmtnuhctuu  to  one 

„;      .  £una.unv.,„.l  ,..>.*,..  ,.f  Scnpture.     lUh.y  ,m,  th.-u  m* 
ChrW,  anJ  s,v  «im  .s  Uc  now  is,  St.  Juhu  U.Us  ,^  «l,n^^^^^^^ 

s„eUa,«KW«.,uia,-ln<ng?  then.  "''""'" '''''•»'^'»°',"tlor 
,  W,mld-In.n,v  f.,llow  tliut  t1„.y  w.mKl  now  possess  the.  fnlkst  go  J 

■  '       Umt  th,.Y  conM-ivcr  l.».k  fo.-  un.l  obtaii/.     Tl.c  popular  viow  thai 

:      r  ■  ;^;^  l,.in«  tho  stato  of  death  are  with  Christ  a.nA  see  Hun. 

•  ■  involves  in  taet  the  denial  of  the  rcaK-reetlon  as  taUKht  by  Pan  , 

:°  toLhes;what  J.e  eonJemneg  us  heresy,  that  the  resurrect.ou  u 
~^     past  uh-eady. "  7 


^- 


COXSCIOUSKKSH    AFTKH   DKATU. 


121 


i 


^   i 


Now,  without  raising  any  debate  as  to  the  interpretation 
of  1  John  ill.  2,  it  is  plain  Mr.  Constable   confounds  two 
different  things  in  this,   viz.,  moral  and  physical   likeness. 
Does  he  really  mean  to  say  that  seeing  Christ  in  the  inter- 
mediate state  would  bring  the  body  out  of  the  grave  and 
glorify  it  ?     So  it  would  seem.     We  how<^ver  l)elieve  that 
resurrection  waits    for    the  word  of  Christ   to    effect,  and 
that  there  can  be  no  "perfection"  for  the  sanit,  short  of 
body,  soul  and  spirit  being  united  in  blessing      Nay,  it  may 
well  be,  that  we  must  put  on  this  "  image  of  the  heavenly  " 
hi  order  even  in  t^  full  sense  to  see  Christ  as  He  is.     All 
this  consists  perfectly  with  the  thouglit  of  being  with  Christ 
in  the  meanwhile  in  such  a  way  as  to  awaken  the  desire  of 
the  living  saint  in  the  fullest  way.     On  the  other  hand  non- 
entity for  the  saint  can  call  forth  no  such  desire,  save  on  the 
supposition  of  an  utter  wretchedness  in  the  present  life  such 
as  Paul  knew  nothing  of,  it  isclear.     Mr.  Constable  shows 
this  fully  in  what  he  has  written  elsewhere.     "  To  one  ca- 
j)able  of  the  vast  gi:asping  thought  of  immortality  death  is 
indeed  a  thiny  of  terror  .  .  .death  is  after  all  tlie  king  of 
-  terrors."     And  he   is  si)eaking   of  Christians   here.      Yet 
when  he  comes  to  argue  about  Paul's  words,  this  king  of 
terrors  becomes  more  attractive  even  than  companionship 
with  Christ  on  earth.     Nonoetity  is  a  sweet  forgetfulness 
which  only  hastens  the  day  cJf  glory !     Which  is  the  true 
-statement  I   must   leave   Mr.    Constable   to   say.     Where 
speaks  the  man.,  and  where  the  rontroversialist^  I  will  not 
try  to  decide.     But  he  is  certainly  self-contradicted,— hope- 
lessly so. 

■  I 'shall  not  again  do  more  than  refer  to  2  Cor.  v.  Its  "  at 
Home  in  the  body  '  and  "  absent  from  the  Lord  "-:-its 
"absent  from  the  body  and  present  with  the  Lord" — speak 
manifestly  the  same  language  as  that  we  have  just  been  con- 
sidering. Those  who  tell  us  that  in  the  resurrection  state 
we  shall  not  be  "at  home  in  the  body,"  and  that  we  are 
"  absent  from  the  body  "  when  it  has  been  raised  in  glory 
or  changed  into  the  likenesH  of  ChristV  glorious  body,  may 


''W 


i\:\ 


i\-- 


I 


■ 


122        P.C->SAN..TK>.0>«.BAS-rO..«™'"'«*^"- 

..hieh  gives  us  «         .^;0   ^^^^  .^  ^^^^  ,_.^^„^.„„,  ,,„ 

been  m  ''™";1'-""  ;  ^^    .  _,,     i^t  conscious  of  unntterabl.. 
m«"»'«''^\*'°';;'    ,'^,2;,..lerm  iVom  11.0  u„see„,-Mose» 

Ih-f  T,"  ''?'   TVrX unUion  with  the  L..nl. 

„„  ,ho  Mount  ot   ru«U.  ^^^^^  .^  ^,^,^^^^  ,,^,,,,,,1 ,,  „„j 

It  is  no  ansnn,  toi  ojc  ,im.i  ^^^   j,^^^^  ^^^i 

..vakencl  to  '^'I'f  ,;;„,  ;^;:!':„:::,;::h  siecp:  nn.lwhen 
,l,cv  that  wove  with  11'"'  ^^^  ."-',■.  „,„,  „,c  two  men  that 
they  weve  .-."</.-  they  saw  U.s  glo  v    ■  "'^  t  ^  ^^^^^^ 

•.      -.1    1,;..,"    This  iirovcs  also  tliat  n  "it  . 

rtood  with  hnn        Itii.    1  ^1^^^^  ,    j,,.^,  ,^gy 

„,•«•«,-,  even    wakmg.  /^^  \'^^,„  ,,,n,,  j„sus."     Thus  it 

behcMit:  •■'^^"^■*''"'\^^'•"''^,"'^^^,o„^    ,A.ul  how  sim- 
t,„s  a  real  thin;,  a,art  from  ^'^  y,,^,.,  ,,„,,  Elias." 

^,y  deseribea,    ■' two  ^    ^'f,,^.  ,™,,,n,^  Wore,  and  , 

bne  of  these  a  ■"^"V'^'''^^  '\-r  " ,  h  is  ho.lv  hnried,  yet  B.iU 
o„c  .till  longer  ■■.U.,«rled.    •»"'*''  ,„^„    ,„  „„i,it-,  of 

a  "man,"  neither  ex.in...  -'•  f  ^  ^  "' ,  ,„„  the  aead 
thought  and  of  -y">;"™-.,^  ,;.  .,..»,.«  was  nhnself 
either,  as  some  would     a      _;>^  ^  „,      „„   aead." 

the    >-firBt-fru,ts.'  and  \  J"J  ^.^^.^  „.s,oration  to  the 
For   it  is   no   qnest.on   hei     o     swnp       ^  ^^^„ 

.      earthly  life  >-.  .,^ined.ns  with  U,^u  ^^^^^^^^^ 

,he  L<.rd  had  so  restored,     t^  ."•  '    "  ,,„,  ,,cen. raised 

^    of  another  ^r'"-.  '"  ""^^y  "'"         ,/"   uib  c      B»t  of  this 

.  ;ti:r  %::: Uid  not^a^  ..en  n.^ ;;;;  <^°: 

■       -■ ■  ti.is   lalsifios  lilt'  whol<' argumpnt, 

.  Roberts,  in  his  oornment    u,ou      -.  ^  ^^^^  ^^^^  ^.^.^,^  .^  ^^^,^ 

ilie  fact  of  iboir  ofiu„  n __ , ^ 

the  rpal  point.  ,  . 


->■■'■        4. 


OONHtUOUSHKSt^  AFFKU  niBATH. 


1*28 


3  ar- 

Rred.  • 

tion, 

have 

b, — a 
rabli' 
losca 

t  not, 
'  and 
when 
ti  that 

mere 

they 
hus  it 
\\'  Bim- 
EUas." 
re/ and   , 
ft  still 
:it7  of 
:>   dead 
timself 

dead." 

to  the 
;,  whom 
^sednesR 
n  raised 

of  this 
as  Scrip- 
irst-born. 
associate 
I  though 

arguinpnt, 
n  is  simply 
•HP  evading 


i 


not  in  the  Ukeness  of  Christ's  glorious  body,'^  yet  appearing 
•'  in  glory  "  {kv  doi^i),  let  men  make  of  it  what  they  will ;  en 
tering  moreover  into  th(i  '  bright  cloud  "  '(as  Peter  calls  it 
afterwards,  "  the  excellent  glory  "),  the  Shechinah  of  the 
Divine' l*res«'nce.t 

1  confess  I  .h>  not  understand  how  it  chu  be  plainer  that 
\^'«  are   here   permitted  to  gaz;' upon  one  dei)arted,  and  to 
Vrealize  as  tar  as  we  can  how  a  departed  Abraham,  Isaac  and 
Jacob  still  •'  live  unto   llhn,'  who,  as  the  Lord  tells  us,  •'  is 
not  the  God  of  the  dead  but  of  the  living."     We  tims  see 
how  to  Iliia  they  live  who  to  men  are  dead.     We  learn  to 
disthiguish  between  the  language  of  sense  and  the  language 
of  faith.     We  learn  how  really  there  is  a  dei)arthig  and  being 
with  Christ  which  is,  comjiared  with  life  on  earth,  far'better. 
No    arguiuent  tliat  Annihilatioriists  can  brhig  against  thin 
passau^e  will  an  ail  for  a  moment.     Their  arguments  have  in 
tact  been  already  disposed  of,  as  they  either  suppose  on  the 
oi^hand  that  Moses  was  raised  from  the  dead,  which  ^cripv  ^ 
ture  elsewhere  (ujiifiites  (C<lr.  i»  is,  1  Cor.  .vv.  '2:5,  Key.  i.  5),  ^ 
or   that   it  was  only  a  "vision'"  or  appearance, 'which' the 
passage  it.self  contrtites.;     T  may  leave  here  then  the  question 
(though  there  be  other  texts)  of  the  o*>nsciousness  of  the 
separate  state,  with  tl>e  full  conviction  of  its  complete,  man- 
ifest and  divine  answer.  •' 

*  This  is  str;iunelyjak<'!i  by  Mr.  Ilobcrts  to  W  siiil  of  Ellas,  and  heiv 
affain  he  argues  upon  a  mere  misconception. 

The  "  fir-t  begotten  of  the  (b'ad, "  applied  to  the  Lord  Jesus,  will  not 
allow  his  interpretation  of  the  lir*-fruits.  It  distinctfv  asserts  that 
He  was  the  lirst  raised  in  the  full  meaning  i  j;jiesurrection.  Enoch  and 
Elias  were  not  begotten  from  tlie  doid  at  all. 

I"  They  (the  disciplea)  feared,  as  ^/i(;w ''  (^i^e/Vai-b)— Mose^*  and 
•Klias— "entered  into  the  cloud."  ^ 

+  <'TeH  the  cixion  to  no  man"  is  somewhat  urged,  but  opixna  ii 
merely  sojnethhig  seen,  and  raises  no  .luestion  of  reality. 


j1--S-38,^K?>?eg§W?-T?: 


t'^T  '^TliiiiiTi^r'- -■"'—'"■-  ■  x-'--"- 


124 


riCiSANUmiiOKU^ASTOAKUTUB^aTAI..         _ 


•>» 


(  !1 


OIlAPTKli  Xlll. 

On.TE.-TlON^KKOM     niKOLUTHSTAME^T. 


I  NOW  proceed  to  consider  the  objections  which  are  made 
to  the  v3 Lave  expressed,  grounded  upon  the  supposed 
;  at\    chin.'  of  ,„a„;passag.s  of  Scripture       t.ts^a  po^ 
Lrthy  of  a.  ten.ion,  how.ever,  at  the  outset,  that  ,»^e  pas 
Ta^    arc  with  few.  and  slight  exceptions,  all  fom^-.n  the 
Old  Telt^ment,  and  especially  in  three  book^  Which  fie  near 
?„g„0,errtl,e'  n.iddlo  of  it  (united  really,  I  doubt  not,  .n      _ 
many  respects)  Job,  I'sabns,  and  Eccles.astes  ^^ 

'"7o   how  this  I  mention  from  Mr.  Roberts'  V-ook  »"  t^"     , 

texts  upon  which  he  relies  to  >-'°'-"  '"--«,  ^Vwe h^^ 
and  the  intermediate  state.    From  pp.40  ..Oof  h.s     Iwe^ve 

ecturcs  ■•  (4th  edit.,  I  ^"'^'^^^^^'^J'^Z^ 
P»a  xxt  3-  x.vii.  -29;  Ixxxix.  48;  Ixxvni.  50,  Kzck.  xv  i. 
r   Ja"iv     4;  Psa.oxnv.3,4;  ciii.   14,16;  G™.  n  7  ;  n>. 
ta    xvii"27;  Uom.vii.  l-^';  Jas.  i.  10;  .Tob.  xiv.  12 ;  Ecc  . 
U'lto;  aen.x.vv.8;  xxxv.  29;  xlix.  .iB ;  I  2b;  Deut. 
•  ^    :■   to*  xxiv.  29;  1  Sam.  xxv.  1;  1  Kmgs n.  1,  A 
lo    U-  i'.  29,    4     1  Kinis  xi.  4:1 ;  U.b.  xi.   l^i;/ohn«. 
r;:V^  \  Thes.  iv.'  13;  KcUx.  10;  .lob  '»•  <   .^";  ^  »    i 
■  Psa.  Ixxxviii.  .1,  10,  12;  c.xv.  1.  ;  x.xxi.x.  ..,  12,  1.5 ,  cxlvi.  -i , 

He  then  proceeds  ,0  cite  the  passages  com.nonly  urged 
..ainst   bisviXs  us   folh.ws;  Luke  NX,u.4.J;  «■•  19^  • 
Acts  vii.  .Ml;  -i  Co..  V.  ><;  Phil.  i.  2S;  Matt.  xv.i.  3;  xxn. 
V-  xviii   10;  I'rov.  xii.  28 :  Matt,  x,  i8. . 
►         Tlius  lV,rA»  ««»  views,  out  of  over  fifty  passages  pro- 
du        nine  belong  to  the  New  Testament  '^^^''^ 
o  the-  Old.     While  out  of  the  passages  wluch  he  thmks 
"         " ■ ■    ■•  hU  views  (though  scanty  ui 


mi^'ht  be  adduced  as  'i:/'/'"St  his  . 

Lumber),  „> "t  of  ^.  are  from  the  New  Testament. 


M 


ob.Vkctions  fkom  tiik  om»  tkhtamknt. 


12ft 


% 


"■f^-^:* 


in 


But  the  dispi<)|»ortion  is  greater  even  than  this,  when  the 
real  value  to  the  writer  of  ihe  texts  <iuoted  im  kept  in  view. 
Thus  even  Mr.  UobertH  can  make  but  little  of  JaH.  i.  9,  10 : 
"  As  the  flower  of  the  grass  he  shall  pass  away ; "  or  of 
chap.  iv.  14:    "What    is  your   life?    it   is   even   a  rapor." 
The  other  passages  are,  that  in  Paul  ( /.  '.'.,  in  hisjlesh)  dwelt 
no  good  thing;  as  to  David,  tliat  he  was  dead  and  buried, 
and   not   ascended    into   the    heavens;  that   Abraham  and 
others  died  in  faitli,  not  liaving  received  the  promises;  that 
Lazarus   was   sleeping,  or   in    plain   language,   dead;    and 
filially,  that" those  that  sleep  in  Jesus  shall  God  bring  with 
Him.  ^ 

Really  does  it  not  seem  a  <pie'stion  between  the  Old  Tes- 
1  anient  and  the  New?  * 

^t  is  not  that;  but  still  there  is  a  tale  that  these  quota- 
tions tell,  the  moral  of  which  will  be  found  in  2  Tim.  i..  10; 
where  the  a])ostle  tells  us,  that  Christ  •' has  abolished  death', 
audi  l)rought  lifean»l  incorruption  (not  immortality)  to  light 
by  the  (lOSi'KL." 

That  means  that  these  writers  are  groping  for  light  amid 
the  shadows  of  a  dispensation  where  was  yet  upon  this  subject 
comparative  darkness.  They  look  at  death  as  it  existed  be- 
fore Christ  had  for  the  believer  abolished  it.  they  look  at 
life  there  where  as  yet  it  had  not  been  "  brought  to  light." 
\o    wonder    if  they   stumble    in    the    darkness    they  have 

t'hosen.        .  . 

lloberts  lepresents  the  "logic"  of  the  application  of  this 
passage  lotlliis  (piestioTi  to  be  :  ""  Life  and  incorruptibility  are 
brought  to  light  In'tlie  gospel ;  therefore  don't  go  to 'the 
Old  Testament  for  light  on  death  an.l  corruptibility." 

It  is  very  strange  that  lu«  should  think  he  needs  light  on 
the  latter  point,  ibr  that  '•  .leath  is  death  "  seems  to  liim  an 
axiom  that  settles  all.  Nay,  ''life'"  also,  and  what  it  iS, 
is  'a  matter  of  positive  ...7^^ //<//'•*'.'"  It  is  the  "aggregate 
result  of  certain  organic  processes,'f  he  tells  us.  He  only 
■IOCS  to  Scripture  to  contirm  this,  which  after  all   We  should 


li:i\e  known  without. 


-it 


ft  »  ■■      * 


"I1 


\ 


mffmmml^ 


'■■K 


12«         FACTS  \SU  THKOltlKS  xa  Tl)  A   PUTUHB  HtATK. 

But  the  abolition  of  <leafh  is  clearly  connected  with  the 
•bringing  life  to  light  by  ^e  gospel,  und  it  is  clear  that  the 
Old'Testament  Htateiuents  niuHt  in  some  way  correspond  to 
this.     Mr.  Roberts  indeed  would  have  it  that  the  gospel 
simply  makes  known-  ''  the  >ray  of  life."     But  Scripture  is 
more  accursite   than  he  supposes   it  to  be,  and  less  plastic 
than  it  rtmlly  seems  as  if  he  would  like  to  have  it.     If  "  life  " 
is  })n)Ughtto  light  by  the  gospel,  as  in  any  and  every  sense 
it  is,  how  could  death  «ven  ije  known  fully  in  the  Old  Testa- 
ment?    Take  Paul  an<l  Job,  as  1  have  befofe  said,  and  com- 
pare their  utterances  as  t«  death,— is  there  no  difterence  ? 
is  there  no  light  conu)  for  PauJ  into  that  land  of  glooiAand 
darkness  which  Job  contemplates':'     Surely  there  is.     \ni 
this  is  the  story  Mr.  Roberts'  cltati<jns  tell. 
X,  Another  p:issat,^e  furnislies  us  with  a  further  poirit  about 
that  old  economy  he  ui^^mIs  to  tnow :  Huit  >»y  the  hanging 
of  the  veil  before  the  holy  i)laces,  "  the  ijoly  Ghost  this 
signified,  that  the  way  int^o  the  holiest  was  not  yet  mqnifest- 
eij^  while, the  first  tabernstcle  was  yet  standing"  (lleb.  ix.  8). 
Mr.  Roberts  wants  to  kn«)W  why  the  aninhilationists  sl^buld 
have  their  attention  drawn  to  thi.s.     "  It  is  the  very  ^hing," 
he  asserts,  "that   prov(!S   their  ease.     Mr.   Grant  contends 
that   Abraham,  Moses,  and  ^thousands   besi<le   thptti    went^. 
into  the  holiest  (that  is,  the  heavenly  state)  as  sootb  as  thei/ 
,  ff/ct/,  '  WHILK  Tin:  I'lUST  TAJiKKXACXE  WA.S  YKT  ST4NDiNG.' 

The  '  i)oor  anuihilatiouists,',  on_jlie  contnuy^  acJ3ept  the 
declaration"  that  the  way  was  not  yet  maniteste(l|  ^hile  the 
ohU'CKnomy  existed,  aiwl  that,  as  Jesus  said,  '  Nd  man  had 
as(;eu<U.Ml  int  < .  heaven."  "  But  tKe  fact  of  Abraham  and  other 
saints  going  to  heaven  ajhrdcafh,  does  not  imply  that  the 
way  there  was  made  manifest  in  the  Old  Testament,  i.  e.,  of 
course  to  men  bej'o/'c  they  died.  Nor  do  the  Lord's  words 
which  he  (juotes  (John  iii.  13)  at  all  imi)ly  even  that  Enoch 
and  Elias  had  not  "ascended  into  heaven.'^  Plainly  they 
had,  and  therefore  Mr.  R.'s  interpretation  of  them  is  convicted 
oi'  untruth.  But  the  l-.ord  is  speaking,  as  the  context  de- 
cisively  shows,  of  availabk  witnc^es  of  ''heaoenly  things" 


7 


OHJEO'ilONS    PKOM    TlIK   OLD   TKSTAMKNT. 


127. 


om  and 
.    Xnd 


/ 


T 


It  was  no  question  of  Enoch  and  Elias,  who  were  not  there 
to  tell  what  they  might  know,  still  less  of  tho  condition  of 
the  departed  lU-ad,  luit  of  there  being  no  other  aceesHible 
witness  of  heavenly  things,  except  Himself,  tho  Son  of 
Man,  and  yvX{6  Mr  ir  tu  ovfmyu^  "subsisting  in  iicaveu." 
"  If  I  have  told  you  of  earthly  things,  and  ye  believe  not, 
how  shall  ye  bwlieve  if  I  tell^you  of  heavenly  things  V  And 
no  man  [evidently,  none  here  to  give  witness]  hath  ascended 
up  to  heaven,  save  lu  who  came  dow^n  from  heaven,  eve.i 
the  Son  of'  Man  who  is  in  heaven.'  To  make  tjiis  clash 
with  Enoch  and  Eiias;havnig  gone  .there  is  surely  a  mere 
t^trainhifj  of  the  words,  and  just  as  mueh  so  to  infer  from  it 
llie  condition  of  the  righteous  dead. 

Doubtless  Mr.  Roberts  Mould    reinforce   this^  untenable 
position  by  a  (juotation  which  (hose,  with  liim  often  dwell 
up|n,to  the  eftect  that  '<  David  ^s  uot  ascended  into  the 
lieiivens."*     That  too  is  freely  granted.     It  is  what  the  Lord 
says  of  Himself  when  risen,  and  yet  He  lyul  been  \n  l*aradise 
with  the  jiardoned   thief     This  will   come  up  again  in  the 
next  chapter,  but  I  may  say  here,  that  Ihe  departure  of  tht; 
spirit   to  Ood   is  never   reckoned   "ascension.','     We  «iay 
inquire  why  shortly,  but  the  fact  may  suflice  for  the  present. 
The  passage  in  Hebrews  does  m><  then  '•  recoil  with  sin- 
gular force  against  '\  the  orthodox  "position."    It  in  no  wise 
teaches  that  the  s{«nis  of  the  Old  Testament  did  not  go  to 
heaven  (//?o-  death,  but  that  therc^  wasno  revelation  yet  of 
their  going  there,  no  promise  of  it  yet  to  living  men.     It  sim- 
ply means  that  the  dispensation  dealt  witl^  earthly  and  not 
heavenly  promises.     Thus  if  the  faith  of  a  Job  carried  him 
on  to  a  di*y  on  which  that  Redeemer  who  he  knew  lived, 
•should  be  seen  by  his  eyes,  it  is  to  His  stan<ling  r/joa,^  tC 
earth  in  the  latter  day  he  looks.     If  Sheol,t  the  land  of 
darkness,  lay  between,  certainly  for  him  that  was  not  honveu. 
N^r  can  Mr.   Roberts  lind  such  a  thought.'     He  does  not 
— "^  Acts  W.'M. "' 

t-TJiP  0I«1   iVstanienl   word  Xw  hailes,  Xht'  unseen  world.     See  Nejf 
( lia^)ter..'  ' 


m 


/    ( 


u\' 


ill 


«l- 


II 


<  I 


^  ! 


i 


K' 


1-28        FACTS  ANU  TIIKOUUW  ASTO  A  FUTUKK  ST.VTK. 

indeed  look  for  it,  I  Avell  know.  The  "heavenly  promises;' 
are  for  him  promises  merely  of  a  "heavenly  >^(atc,"  as  he 
might  say,  on  earth.  This  is  again  the  darkness  of  the 
former  dispensatioTi  imported  into,  the  full  light  of  the  Chris- 
tian one.'  I  cannot  discuss  it  liero,  nor,  liappily,  need  I  for 
the  mass  of  those  who  may  read  this. 

^But  such  then  as  Job's  was  the  Old  Ti'st anient  hope. 
Outside  the  present  scene  tlM>re  was  little  light,  death  a  deep, 
dark  "  bhadow,"  well-nigh  imi.onetrabje,  resurrection  Jind 
restoration  to  a  scene  of  earthly  blessedness  the  tangible, 
plain  thing.  Scattered  I»ints  there  were,  indeed,  of  other 
things.  Enoch  liad  of  old  gone, to  God,  j\nd  not  seen  death. 
Elijah  m  a  later  day  had  followed  him.  A  little  gleam  of 
light  liad  broken  in  there.  But  still  that  was  not  the  reve- 
lation of  the  heavenly  places  and  a  portion  there  for  those 
who  believed.  Nor  was  death  abolished,  or  life  and  incor- 
ruption  brought  to  light. 

Still  they  were  not  annihllationists;  as  Pharisaism,  \yhich 
the  people  followed,  shows.  Something?  thej^  did  know: 
and  with  all  their  darkness  were  wiser  than  those  who  have 
■  now  turned  from  the  light  which  lias  come,  back  into  it. 
This  even  necromancy  witnessed.  Ileathcriish  as  of  course 
it  was,  yet  its  practice  testifi(?s  to  the  belief  which  lay  at 
the  foundation  of  it.  And  the  bringijig  up  of  Samuelt  is  an 
Old  Testament  confirmation  of  that  belief  too  strong  for  any 
cavils  of  questioners  to  set  aside.    . 

T^rue,  in.leed,  the  departed  spirit  pf  a  saint  was  not  at  the 
mercy  of  a  witch  to  summon  into  pr^ence.  And  the  ap- 
pearance of  the  prophet  threw  ?the  woman  herself  into 
astonishment;  but  so  God  permitted  Saul  to  get  his  answer 

♦  Some  (lifflculty  will  be  fouii<l  perhaps  in  rfconcilin?  Ih'h.  xi.  13-lH 
"    with  this.     T  fully  admit  that  this  jtass^ge  shows  that  individualH  had 

hope  beyond  the  proper  Old  TeRtamont  revelation.  TJow  they  got  this 
"  we  hope  yet  to  inquire.     But  that  certainly  t)o  rmolatioti  of  it  is  given 

in  the  Old  Testament  itself,  I  can  only  onro  again  v.M-y  simply  affirm. 

Let  my  readers  sean'li  and  see. 


f  1  Sam.  xxviii. 


i  ■ «:  i 


m 


T-rt- 


.  ■■  't 


n| 


~t;.. 


)mi8e8 
,"  as  ho 
?  of  the : 

le  Chris- 
LV(l  I  for 

it  hope.* 
I  a  (leei), 
ion  Jind 
tangible, 
of  other 
!n  death. 
;leam  of 
the  reve- 
br  those 
id  incor- 

tn,  Avhich 
d  know: 
tvho  have 
[ito  it. 
of  course 
ich  lay  at 
uelt  is  an 
ig  for  any 

not  at  the 
id  the  ap- 
rself  into 
lis  answer 

b.  xi.  13-1« 
viclualft  hail 
l^ipy  got  this 
f  it  is  given 
inply  aflRrni. 


OBJECTIONS  FROM  THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.  129 

of  doom.  The  language  of  the  histoiuan  should  be  plain  to 
any  one  who  believes  in  the  full  inspiration  of  •  Scripture, 
that  the  woman  saw  Samuel,  and  that  Samuel  spoke  to  Saul. 
Mr.  Roberts  may  raise  questions  which  our  inability  to  an- 
swer would  not  show  were  valid  as  arguments  against  *the 
hispifed  words.  But  if,  as  he  suggests,  the  nature  of  the 
apparition  was  that  it  was  "the  spectral  impression  of 
Samuel  in  the  woman's  brain  reflected  from  that  of  Saul," 
how  did  this  "  spectral  impression  "  sj^eak  to-A.Saul  ?  Mr. 
Roberts  would  answer  evidently  "  through  the  woman "  • 
but  not  so  says  Scripture.  It  is  his  own  invention,  as  the 
spectral  impression  is.  MoreoVer  his  difficulty  as  to  Samuel 
appearing  in  his  clothes,  as  that  of  others,  that  he  is  seen  as 
an  old  man,  we  may  answer  by  saying  that  we  know  too 
little  of  spiritual  appearances  even  to  apprehend  them  as 
difficulties.  Nor  does  it  seem  one  that  Saul  himself  should  not 
have  seen  the  spirit  of  Samuel,  any  more  than  that  ElishaV 
servant  did  not  see  the  horses  and  cliariots  of  fire  around 
Dothan  (2  Kings  vi.  17).  How  many  similar  questions 
might  Mr.  R.  ask  about  these,  and  find,  or  give,  as  little 
answer !  '  . 

Then  as  to  the  "bringing  /<y>,'' which  Mr.  R.  considers 
should  be,  according  to  our  views,  rather  "  bringing  down^'' 
this  is  his  mistake,  and  we  shall  look  at  it  in  the  next  chap- 
ter. While  ".to-morrow  shall  thou  and  thy  sons  be  with 
me;'  means  merely  in  the  death  state,  or  in  sheol,  as  a 
Hebrew  might  have  expressed  it. 

I  onlj^  dwell  upon  this  to  show  that  all  was  wo«  dark, 
even  here,  as  to  immortality.  People  may  talk,  as  some  do, 
Of  resurrection,  but  there  is  none,  and  the-  thought  of  it 
would  only  complicate  the  difficulties  of  the  case. 

•Without  further  preface  I  turn  to  the  passages  which 
they  adduce  as  decisive  of  the  point  we  are  upon,  that  the 
dead  are  non-existent,  or  at  least  unconscious  till  the  resut- 
rection. 

We  naturally  begin  with  Genesis,  but  here  the  passages 
produced  have  been  already  examined,  save  xviii.  27  ;  xxv. 


'0F:-: 


n 


».' 


i,!. 

■  i  I 


130         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

8;  XXXV.  29;  xlix.  33;  1.  26.  The  reader  may  refer  to 
these  (except  the  first)  for  himself,  as  they  are  the  mere 
chronicle  of  the  deaths  of  the  patriarchs,  "  soher  and  literal," 
as  we  quite  believe,  and  as  is  the  fashion  of  Scripture  gener- 
ally, and  with  "no  heaven-going  rhapsody,"  as  Mr.  Roberts 
tells  us.  There  could  hardly  T)e,  as  I  have  already  shown. 
Deut.  xxxiv.  5,  G ;  Josh.  xxiv.  2f);  1  Sam.  xxt.  1;  1  Kings 
ii.  1,  2,  Lfl^nd  xi.  43,  all  come 'under  the  same  category. 
It  is  sufficient  for  Mr.  R.  that  he^  finds  a  text  ii^  which  it  is 
said  such  a  person  ''  died,"  to  find  a  proof  text'in  it  for  ex- 
tinction; and  if  it  should  add,  that  he  was  "  buried,"  then 
all  dispute  about  the  matter  should  be  ended  forever.  For 
it  seems  none  but  materialists  ever  speak  of  people  dy- 
ing or  being  buried,  or  if  so  Mr.  Roberts  has  not  heard 

of  it. 

Abraham's  lowly  confession,  "who  am  but  dust  and 
ashes"  (Gen.  xviii.  27),  which  he  takes  to  imply  the  lowest 
materialism,  may  perhaps  be  left  to  speak  for  itself  Of 
course  that  spirit  of  liian,  which  sometimes  Mr.  Roberts 
reckons  part  of  him,  sometimes  the  highest  part,  is  here  none 
whatever,  or  else  it  too  is  "  dust."  He  joins  with  this  Paul's 
"in  me,  that  is  in  mj flesh,''  equally  to  imply  that  PalHwas 
nothing  hut  flesh.  On  the  further  expression  in  the  same 
r  chapter,  "with  the  ttihid,  I  mynelf  nervQ  the  law  of  God, 
but  with  the  flesh  the  law  of  sin,"  he  does  not  comment. 

Outside    oil/ Job   and   its  kindred  books   two  passages 

remain.     One  is  Ezek.  xvili.  4 :  "  the  soul .  that  sinneth  it 

,  shall  die."     Hercj  as  I  have  before  noticed,  the  soiil  is  put 

^  for  the  personality  of  man.     "  The  soul  that  sins  shall  die." 

Not  a  son  for  a  father's  sins,  or  a  father  for  a  son's,  but 

'  every  one  for  hift>wn.     This  use  of  the  word  does  not,  as 

Mr.  R.  imagines,  conflict  with  its  proper  force  when  used, 

as  it  has  been  proved  Scripttire  doe/»  use  it,  for  the  immortal 

part   of  man.     The   other  uses   are  all  secondary  to  and 

founded  on  this,  of  which  I  have  at  large  si)oken. 

The  other  passage  is  Isa.  xxxviii.  18,  19.     It  introdueeB 
us  to  that  class  of  texts  to  which  belong  the  quotations 


«MW»M;»'-MH.MIiW.~»,»..,.~-v.^^ , 


the  histprica.  book  t^T\  "^  ""  "'«  '»'•  While 
'«vi.e  hiatonan.  at  '  rj^-t*'/'-  '»f-,e  of  the 
more  directly  the  words  if  7,,  '^  P'-oP'"^'"  are  still 
through  theLonhelto  tto  '  :  "'™^»> '"''l™««d 
Soripture  whL  t^plf ^0^^-,,^ j.-"""  of  the 
siastes  and  the  Sono-  of  ^^i  f^airus,  Proverbs,  Eccle- 

Of  eo„r.,e  I  <u,  ^:c^:ir^;::'^-!"-^  -!„... 

that  account.     Every  wor.l  T    i     i  "^  inspired  on 

by  the  Holy  Ghos  Vmle/f^o  ;  j  ""V'^  "^"'""^  ^"^  - 
what  is  profitable  uu^Zm     ^tn   T      1  """''''-  """ 
for  instance  we  do  find  Znt,         '    , .'™  '^"'^' '"' '"  Jo^ 
the  more  adopt  /,/.  saying  ",^^0  """^•''*'''  '''  '°  ""'  ""y 
They  are  carefnlly  reg^Xd  for     :':S'?  ^'•^^'^ 
-Butwedonotsay''itrswritte,."„f  tT^      div.ne  p,„j,<,se. 
His  hand  and  to,L  a^  1  "tl  ^l^h     '^,"'"°'''''""°«'' 
His  face.     Th,t  was  wT^at  SW      m  '   ,    "'"  ""^  H'""  »» 
So  in  like  mater  Xn  the  L     T    ' '""'""""'  "  ''^  ^"'"»- 
have  not  spoken  of"  e  tl '  thi"    .f^'  '"  "^"''''  '■™°''^"  ^^ 
vant  Job,"  it  is  plain  we  can  "•     ''"  "  "'"'*' '"'  '"^  '"'- 
-ymgs,  as   diviL  truTh  eX  '"tTT'''^  »J°P'  '"«> 
Job's  Awn  sayings,  spite  o f  t  '     '  ""  '™  "«•»«  '<> 

prosscVwe  find  thai  too     ,  r""""";'''*'™  '"  ''"  - 
himself  rather  than   God '7eh\.  IVoT'Vt  "^''\"''^'' 

maiffcho  hart  ransacked  th.        1 ,  "'^pcncnce  ofa 

t'-'tligs  he  "  s  dt  i  t  :- 'wh-Vf  *■•  •■Winess,a„d 
vain  and  weary  course  We  k'l  It '"  ''"''  '""•"''"«  ''"at 
«pite  of  his  wisdom  and  ,h'''  ^'as Solomon's  career 
own  conclusion  nZ  U,  t    T"'  ™"3°'''>tedly  to  be  his 


lie 


so  well  knew.     Won    T      ,  °f  "'<'.* """yof  the  world 
.        ,  ,  '^"''''l't.V0t  1.0  believed,  that  this  man's 


h»  r 


132        FACTS  AND  TnEOKIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

"sayings,"  penned  by  himself  for  our  instruction  in  the  word 
of  God,  have  been  taken  by  materialists  as  the  sayings  of 
divine  truth,  to  sottle  it  that  men  are  "  beasts, '  that  "  a  man 
k  has  ko  preeminence  above  a  beast "  V 

The  Psalms  indeed  are  of  a  different  character.    They  are 

much  more  really  prophetic  in  character,-nay,  in  one  sense, 
fully  so.  Still  their 'prophecy  has 'the  peculiarity,  in  which 
they  resemble  the.  others,  of  its  being  the  projection  of  hu- 
man thoughts  and  feelings  uppn  the  page,  which,  under  the 
control  of  the  Spirit  of .  God,  become  the  foreshadows  of  - 
anothei:  day  and  scene.     Thus  David  muses  upon  his  own 

-  sufferings  until  his  thoughts  find  vent  in  words,  which  guided 
of  God  become,  full  of  a  deeper  meaning  than  any  application 
to  Bavjd  could  exhaust— proplietic  utterances  of  Another, 
more  than  royal,  Sufferer.  But  that  is  very  different  from 
direct: revelation.  It  leaves  the  utterer  to  speak  of  things  as 
from  tis  own  point  of  view  he  sees  them,  even  while  giving 
them  this  deeper 'significance. 

M^.  Roberts  has  surely  somewhat  mistaken  what  is  said 
on  this'  head,  when  he  asserts  that  it  makes  these  books  *'  in 

•  fact  of  no  greater  value  than  a  newpapor  report."  On  £he 
contrary  it  makes  them  of  the  .very  greatest  value.  \ 

Is  it  not  this,  that  all  the  difficult  problems  as  to  the  "world 
and  himself  also,  problems  which  man's  heart  ponders  only 
thoroughly  to  lose  its  way  in,  should  be  allowed  once  for 
all  to  find  expression  in  the  presence  of  God,  whore  alone 
they  can  find  their  perfect  answer  ?  Man's  voice  j)crmitted  . 
Mf  titter  itself  fhuSj—its  questions,  doubts,  objections,  rea- 
sonings  ^before  One  lot  uijinteresled,  wTio  con-descends  to 

take  the  place  of  listener,*  and  does  not  decide  a  case  beforb 
he  hears  it :  is  not  this  worthy  of  God  to  give  us  ?  is  this  of 

4l^o  more  value  than  a  newspaper  report  ?•  I  speak  for  myself 
only  when  I  say,  that  to  me  it  is  of  tlKs  profoundest  interest, 
and  of  the',deepest  value.  -  /  ,       ^.    ..         • 

This  applies  of  course  mainly  to  the  books  before  us,  Job, 
Ecclesiastes,  and  (in  much  smaller  measure)  to  the  Psalms'. 
Now,  as  to  the  facts  alleged  bj'  IVJn  R.  ag.iinst  it.     The  qu<5- 


\  t 


u: 


.  OBJECTIONS    FliOM    THE  OLD   TESTAMENT.  133 

■     ^  t  ^."i"-  /*'  ""*'' ''™"  ""«"■  "  «""«»■"  "  to  the  book 
m  the  Ne  .  Tesi.,„c„t,  he  give,  in  p.oof  of  Job  a.  a  whole 

Jobt  21,  rofelredtoinl  Tim.  vi.  7.  (n)  ... 

i.  21   22  ;  xlii.  1-7,  referred  to  i'a  J.„.  v:  U. 
,_        «'•. ".  referred  toin  Rev.  iii.  7p.) 

XEtiv.  lU.TOfcrrod  to  in  Rom.  ii.  11 ;  Epli  ,1  9.  OoLfli  ">K 
sli.  Jl.  refcrro,Ud  ia  Rom.  xi.  ^  ' /^P"' "^^ •°<^'^  ^■ 
Of  these  refewJnces  it  will  be  seen  that  Jas.  v.  11  merely 
speaks  o  Job  s  patience  and'the end  of ahe  Lord.  1  xTm  vf 
17  ^a  Key.  .,,,7  are  ver/  dotfbtfi.l  asallusions  al ailf  Kom' 
XL  3o  refers  to  G^l's  answer  to  Job,  which  of  course  000^0 
quesfons  a.  His^iee ;  while  the  three  passage rRru 

0  Go:  'sL   ""'  ?"'•  "'■  ''  '"^^  """"«  t°  -hat  ElihZ;' 

01  God  snot  accepting  persons,  but  are  the  expression  of  so 
^™p!e  a.™t„  that  it  scaree„„eeds  to  consiAth::  tZ  ■ 

But  ElilmlAnsfilf  moreover  is  not  one  of  the  three  friends 
conv,cted  o,  faLsehood  Uy  Jehovah,  but  one  who  is  utdt 
g^ve  Job  h,s  a„.swer,  after  they  anS  he  both  have  left  off 

then  !v*v'  '■'•'■""''"' ,"'™  """  ■"'  ""  """^  New  Testament 
rtere  ,s  one  more  or  less  doubtful  inference  to  Job's  own 
woM.,,  and  th,s  one  .notation  of  the  words  of  Eliphaz,!^ 

'Of  ."-A    -  ,t  V"''"'"''  *''•'  "'^^  '°  "«-"^  o-"  -''ft"--" 
ut  th,s  Mr.  K„l,„rts  says :  "  The  speakeris  Eliphaz,  whose 

of  them  „T  T'""'''"'  '"'"•'^  '■'^''"  ^o-gl^  ^is  application 

a'vT  '"/°'V  «^f  *»^  ^v^ng"     But  this  is  not  true. 

.  Go  1  s  own  wor,ls  n.ake  the  express  distinction  between^Tob 

the  ,V  t:  "■"■'•'^'  """•  """"--^  '"'>  "  spoken  OF  Hm 
the  th,ng*th.,t  w.a.,.  right,,  they  had  nol  done  so."   AU  of 

them,  Job  ,nc  nded,  had  erred  in  the  interpretation  of  GodV 
dealings,  ,f  that  were, all;  and  on *haf  account,  first  Elihu 
m:  jlt:;^^::^-."^-''":'  ^'-°  «°^  Himself  speaJ 


:   ■If-'l 

-,'*•' 

1   •.■■■■■ 
1-         .     ■ 

;"''-:'■'■ 

V  ;■ : 

t'          ■'■ 

■  ■"  *■ 

t 

ly. 

I  trA 

not; 


'  *'^'*1  spoken  :rightly  o/^  <?o.Z/  and  his  friends  had    ' 


•^. 


V 


** 


"i  \- 


I  !  '    I 


184        FACTS  AND  TDEOKIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.      ..     . 

'     tet  Eliphaz  for  all  that  could  say  many  a  true  thing,  truth 

/    ihat  doubtless  he  had  learnt  of  God,  and  could  utter  as 

.    rem  HiuM  and  one  sucl.  saying  the  Holy  Ghost  gives  us 

;  certia,id  .i;ron:.h  the  n.oulh  of  Paul.     This  »«ld  not  cc.t.  y     .,  , 

the  things  which  the  same  Eliphaz  had  spoken  wh.ch  were 

'*''E^?n  ivf^-.- Roberts  allows.^there  is  not  the  same  direct 
recognition  of  Eeclesiastes."     He  think,  that '' a  remark  of 
Paul's  in  1  Tim.  vi.  7  looks  like  a  quotation  of  Eccl.  v.  lo. 
It  may  refer  to  it,  but  it  is  one  of  those  self-evident,, how- 
.    ever  solemn,  truths,  that  nc^ed  no  inspired  authority  to  assure 
us  of  them.     The  passage  has  ali'eady  been  made  to^serve 
as  a  reference  to  Job,  and  in  Bagster's  list  is  again  referred,     .  • 
though  doubtingly,  to  Psa.xlix.  17.     Iloberts  adds,  "  Never-       , 
theless  the  book  stands  on  its  own  foundation,  as  the  product 
of  a  man  to  whom  God  gave  wisdom,"  etc.     The  mspiration 
of  the  book  is  noUt  all  in  question,  but  its  character  and  pur-       « 

pose.     The  matter  of  Solomon's  wisdom  has  been-  alreadxJ 

«■'    discussed    *  '  ' '  <^  .  .    -" 

As  to  the  Psalms,  they  are  iitidoubtedly  divine,  but  that 
is  not  the  question.     While  inspired  fully,  their  utterance, 

'      as  Already  s'ai<l,  is  so.  far  lik^  the  rest,  that  the  pomt  of  view      . 

'     is  that  of  a  man  upon  earth,  the  horizon  earthly  the  thoughts 
and  feelings  in  accordance  with  this..    Granted,  fully  grant- 
ed, that  the  divine  is  in  the  human  everywhere,  it  is  none 
tile  less  man's  song  or  man's  sorrow,  human  utterance  out    ^ 
of  a  human  heart,  with  only  exceptional  direct  sayings  ot 

Proverbs  again  is  moSt  evidently,  human,  however  perfect 

•  and  divine  in,  its  authority,  as  it-  surely  is.    ?lr.  Roberts 

Votes  Heb.   xii.  5  against   this,  halving  the  passage  cUed 

'     from  J>rov.SlL  II,  12,  bg  leaoing  out  ver.  6.     He  can  thus 

'apply  the  passage  as  if  the  apostle  meant  by  merely  quotiiig, 

«  My  son,  despise  not,"  to  show  that  God  in  that  exhortation 

^  is  -spcakmg  ^tous  as  nnto  children,"  and  therefore  that 

Proverbs' was  cZ^Vec^  God's  voice.     The  very  form  of  the 

exhortation  slioujfliave  taught  him  better,  for  it  is  not    my 


*  •• 


ath 
as 
us 

ere 

:ect 
of      ' 

L5."    ■ 

ow- 

mre 

jrve 

red,    ^ 

ver- 

luct 

,tion 

pur- 

iadx7 
that 

view 
icchts 
rant- 
none* 
5  out 
;8  of  ' 

;rfect 
berts 
cited 

thus 
3ting, 
ation 

that 


»f  the 


;  ^      .     OBffEClJqNS  FKOM   THB  OLD  TJiSTAM^NlV  135 

son,  despise  not  my  ehast^^g,"  but  the  «  chastening  o/- ^A^e 
Z^nl    ;  and  the  apostle's-proof  that  Scripture  in  that  ex- 
hortation speaks  to  us  as  unto  sons  is  that  -  whom  the  Lord 
loveth  He  chastcneth,  and  scourgeth  every  son  whom  He 
reoeiveth."*     Th(?  real  argument  is  concealed  in  the  verse 
Which  he,  for  whatever  reason,  pleases  to  i<more 
_^A11  the  weight  of  what  Job  says  is  found  in  the  following 
expressions:  that,  had  he  died  from  the  womb,  he  would  " 
,      then  liave  been  lying  still  and  quiet,  he  would  have  slept 
aiid  been  at  rest,  as  an  hidden  untimely  birth,  there  wherq 
he  wicked  cease  from  troubling  and  the  weary  are  at  rest 
(ch.  111.  lo-1 . ) ;  that  he  would  have  been  as  though  he  had 
not  been,  m  a  land  of  darkness  and  the  shadow  of  death 
a  land  of  darkness,  as  darknessV  itself;  and  of  the  shadow  of 
death  Without  any  order,  and  ^here  the  light  is  as  darkness 

:  "^M,    iV'  ^"*^,*^''^*'!^^^ath  man  lieth  down  and  riseth 
not;  till  the  heavens  be  no  more  they  shall  not  awake  nor  be  * 
raised  out  ot  their  sleep  (ch.  xiv.  lij).    ' 
^  ^ow,  as  I  have  said,  I  am  not  concerned  to  prove  the 
^armony  of  allJob's  uttefances  with  the  actual  revelations 
of  Scripture  a^to  the  intermediate  state.     He  might  hav0 
been.misfaken,  and  that  in  noway  touch  the  question  before 
ns,  or  the  perfect^  inspiration  of  the  rec6rd  in  which  his 
.     words  are  found.     They  are  given  .as  Job'.s  wordfc,  that  is' 
all.     vVs  th(5  utterance  of  a  saint  of  those  old  days,  they  con- 
tain, no  doubt,  the  assurance  of  the  dimness  and  uncertainty 
which  then   prevailed.     Contrasted    with  Paul's  language 
they  8ho;v  us  death  not  yet  abolished,  "  darkness"  not  yet 
dispelled  by  li^^ht.     Yet  the  words  cannot  be  fairly  pressed  ' 
into  the  service  of  materialism.     Take  the  very  strongest     v 
expression,  •;  I  sbouhl  have  been  as  though  I  had  not  be^n  » 
with  iH3lat.on  to  the  wot^d^and  its  sorrows,  of  which  he  was 
^peaking.  It  was  simple  t^nith.     .\o  as  to  oppression  :  "there 
the  servant  is  free  from  his  master."  "  He  might  have  died 


k*«i"„n?r''^'CT''  ^-  ^  ^^'her  th;.sonin  whom  he  delighteth." 
The  (iuotatioum  Hebrews  i§  from  the  Septuagint,  . 


■  --if ' 


■  >  .■ 


^ 
f 


li: 


136         FACTS  ANDTHKORIES  ASTO  AFUTUUKSTATK. 

under  the  lash,  but  dyipg,  death  set  him  free.      "  There  the 
wicked  cease  from  troubling,  and  the  weary  are  at  rest. 
"  But,  you  say,  although  that  may  be  as  regards  earthly 
troubles  yet  if  there  were  misery  of  another  kind  awaitmg 
man  after  death,  could  he  talk  so  complacently  of  the  "  weary 

being  at  rest  ? "  ,  -  /  j. 

Well,  but  to  all  that  made  Job  weary,  the  grave  would 
be  rest.  And  for  au'-ht  else.  Job  was  ii  saint  of  Go<l  after 
all  and  had  confidence  in  God.  He  was  not  meditatmg 
upon  the  portion  of  the  wicked,  but  what  his  own  would  be ;  . 
and  though  in  death  a  "  land  of  darkness  "  stretched  before 
him  into  which  his  eye  could  little  penetrate,  he  had  some- 
thing of  the  Psalmist's  confidence  in  One  who  would  be  with 
him  there.  The  sorrows  of  the  wicked  are  not  at  all 
before  him,  but  for  himself  the  end  of  all  present  sorrows. 

^T.  Roberts  may  say,  "  There  (in  the  f/rave)  the  weary 
are  at  rest,"  but  'Job  does  nol  say  *'  in  the  grave  "  ;  and  he 
may  think  it  " obvious "  that  he  means  "righteous  and 
wicked  without  distinction."  I  can  only  say  to  myself  it  is 
very  far  from  obvious.  He  was  surely  thinkini?  of  his  own 
sorrows,  and  as  to  the  "  wicked,"  what  he  says  is.  they  "  cease 
from  troubling."  Mr.  R.  would  give  righteous  and  wicked ; 
alike  rest  in  7io?ie7if!f!/  in  the  grave.  But  /•>•  this  "  rest"  ? 
Who  rests?     Can  a  thing  that  is  not,  rest ?    I  think  not,  li 

words  have  meaning.  '    ..\     v.  .  •* 

Moreover,  ch.  x.'  21,  and  xvi.  22  prove  positively  that  it- 
is  in  the  track  indicated  Job's  thoughts  arc  running.     If 
otherwise,  then  when  he  says  that  in  dying  he  "  goes  whence  - 
he  Bhall  not  return,"  he  simply  denies  all  resurrection.     But 
he  is  thinkmg  of  a  return  to  the  scene  before  him.     It  is  not, 
an  abstract  statement,  but  one  very  simply  referring^d  the 
scene  of  mingled  joy  and  sorrow,  in  the  midst  of  which  he 
then  was.     And  so  Scripture  often  speaks.     '' Enoch   7ca.s- 
not "     Is  that  extinction  V     Xo,  «  he  w:>m  translated,  that  he 


should  not  see  death."     As  to  the  woild  '•  he  was  not,"  but 
as  to  God  he  was,  for"  God  took  him.';*_  Just  as  with  Abra- 
M}eiK  v."247  Heb.  xx.  6.    ''Infantk'that  never  sawjight;'  spite  of 


.         w-;ynJK(;TiuNH  Puon  fiiK  dM»  testament.         137 

ham,  l^ai;.una  Jacob,  who  really  diea;  To  men  they  died ;  to 
God  they  lived:  "Forlle  is  not  the  ^od  of  the  dead  but 
ot  thchv in.i.,  for  all  liye  unto'Him  "  (Lufce  xx.  3^).  People 
inay  say  that  that  means  "  in  the  purpose  o^lGod,"  but  thenlf 
they  had  ceased  to  be,  lie  coul.l  not  be  their  God,  the  rela- 
.  lonship  between  God  and  Hi^^  creature 'mv{.t  end  with  the 
heimroi  the  creature.  That  is  simply  and  Vidently  the 
Lord  8  meanmg.  If.to  Una  they  are  dead,  they  are  no  longer 
Hm^creatures,   nor   He   their   God.      The   relationship's 

Job's  words,  the»,  are  no  contradiction  of  what  we  have 

seen  elsewhere  to  bo  l  he  reveule.l  truth  as  to  those  departed. 

lo  wearmess  such  as  his  a  place  of  '•  rest,"  indeed,  was  the 

,  unseen  world  ;  but  "  rest "  is  not  extinction  ;  ancVif  it  were 

a     land  of  darkness  "  also,  darkness  tind  nonentity  are  ab$o^ 

iutely  contradictory  thoughts,'      *  -  • 

>    ^^^5*!^^d=^l^l^^ 

Mr.  R/s  protest,  are  beings  that  have  begun  t  J  live,  a»cl  h^T^^^^^t 
.^rn  Job's  ^erence  to  these  has  no  f^uhdation.     Besides,  tharH: 

The  statement  that  Enoch  "was  m.t  "  ho  supposes  to  be  a  Hebrew    . 
n.ps.s:  a  rather  vague  hut  scholarly  h>oking  expression  to  cot^  a 
d.fficulty  wuh.     Will  Mr.  11.  define  and  illustrate  it  7     But  Paul  [^ 

fill  up  the  elhps.s.     We  need  have  no  objection  to  the  explanation  as 

Has  not     J  therefore,  ol  course  was  not  foand;  yet  even  in  tli«apos^ 
es  vordsyou  nu.st  mentally  supply  "  on  earth,"  as  we  must  conS^ 
hat  he  was  found,  1  suppose,  in  hman.     That  is,  we'  must  still  keep 
he  objectionable  limitation,  which  Mr.  11.  refuses,  and  the  apostle's 
language  only  confirms  us  in  it  the  more.^ 

■      It  is  .strange,  therefore,  that  when  we  tip  to  David's  words, "  while 

I   have   any  being,"  and  "Lefore   I  gHence,  and     be  no  more." 

^nd   explam    them   by    the   exactly   parallel  expression.   Enoch   ^ 

.o  .   hat  Mr  R  should  tells  us,  "  The  .fallacy  of  Ihls  we  have  aS 

pointed  out,"  when  '•"  '>"•  -  • --'i  -         .    .  «"icauy 


..  ,^^,       ,  ho  lias  actually  configued  the  truth  of  it.    For 

L  n  r.'  !"'^r  "''^"''  '^"  '"^-^  not  found  on  earth,  xvhy  should 

n^he^psalm,stV.be  no  more''  me^  similarly  "no  more  Lnd  on 


Ill 


Jit: 


138       'IPACTS  AND  tllEOlUES  AS  TO  A  FUTUBB  StATE. 

explained,  and  to  ihem  I  need  not  return.     1  turn  now  to 

JlccleBiastes. 

And  here  all  that  they  urge  has  been  already  virtually, 
and,  except  one  passage,  actually  answered.  That  one  paH- 
sage  is  found,  ch.  ix.  5,  6:  "For  the  living  know  that 
they  shall  die;  but  the  dead  know  not  anythimj,  neither 
have  they  any  more  a  reward,  for  the  memory  of  them  is 
forgotten  ;  also  their  love  and  their  hatred  and'  their  envy 
•  ; .  is  now  perished;  neither  have  they  any  more  a  portion  for- 
-  '       ever  in  anything  that  is  done  under  the  sun." 

Further  on  (ver.  10)  in  continuation :  «  Whatsoever  thy 
hand  findeth  to  do, do  it  with  thy  might;  for  there  is  no 
work,  nor  device,  nor  knowledge,  nor  wisdom,  in  the  grave  ^ 
(sheol)  whither  thou  goeet." 

Now  this  is  a  very  plain  example  of  that  way  of  speaking, 
looking  at  things  from  a  mere  human  stand-point,  which  I 
have  before:  remarked  upon.  The  writer's  point  of  view  is 
mostevident.  Nor  was  he  capable,  at  the  time  he  had  these 
thoughts,  of  any  other;  As  to  the  dead  actually,  he  "  knew 
not  anything,"  fpf  he  knew  not  whether  the  spirit  of  man 
-^^  went  upward  or  not.    This  we  have  seenT    He  was  not,  there- 

fore, capable  of  looking  at  anything,  save  from  his  stand- 
point in  the  world.  Otherwise  clearly  he  could  not  have  ^ 
said,  '•  Neither  have  they  any  more  a  reward. "  That  w^ould 
dpny  all  resurrection  and  life  to  come",  if  taken  absolutely. 
But  he  was  looking  at  the  scene  around,  out  of  which,  men 
departed,  and  left  no  sign  behind  to  indicate  that  they  had 
"  been ;  their  memory  was  forgotten ;  their  love,  hatred,  envy, 
which  had  once  made  them  conspicuous  actors  in  the  scene, 
had  vanished ;  and,  ia  relation  <a  i7, they  knew  nothing,  their 
if  V      wisdom  anc;!  knowledge  had  departed  too.     This  does  not 

mean,  as  Roberts  suggests,  that  they  "  lost  their  memories»" 
or  mat  they  became  fools ;  but  they  knew  nothing  of  things 
uuong  place  after  their  departure,*  nor  could  their  wisdomr 

or  Knowledge  appear  in  it-any  more.    The  closing  sentence 
Bnows  crfiarly.^o-what  the  former  part  applies:  *V Neither  ' 
77  .  *  Coinp.  Job.  xiT.  21. 


.,1 


^  OBJECTIONS  FROM   THE  OLD  TE8TAM1SNT.  139 

have  they  any  more  a  portion  forever  in  anythmy  that  is 
done  iiniior  the  sun.'''' 

Therefore  the  moral  is,  Be'^sy  now;  work  ceases  in  the 
grave;  wisdom  for  this  busy  «t;ene  there  is. none  there;  no 
heart  that  deviseth ;  no  planning  head.  All  true  m  its  way. 
But  this  was  man's  musings,  not  divine  revelation  of  the 
state  of  the  dead  at  all,  nor  given  as  such.  Had  you  asked 
this  man  what  he  knew  of  that,  he  would  have  said,  as  he 
did  say,  Who  knows  V*  "  Who  knoweth  the  spirit  of  man 
vthat  goeth  |pward  ?  »  He  saw  the  dust  laid  in  the  tomb, 
and  that  was  all  he  kne^n.  The  rest  was  conjecture,  nothing 
more. 

But  that;/  was  only  part  of  the  preacher's  utterances^  the 
musings  of  his  heart  while  vainly  seekiilg  to  "  8ear<5ft  out  by 
wisdom  all  things  that  are  ulone  under  heaven  "  (ch.  i.  13). 
But  the  time  came  when  he  had  to  own  his  inability  to  do 
so.  To  quote  once  more  his  lowly  confession  (ch.  xi.  5) : 
"As  thou  knowest  not  what  is  the  way  of  the  spirit,!  nor 
how  the  bones  do  grow  in  the  womb  of  •  her  that  is  with 
child;  even  so  thou  knowest  not  the 'works  of  God  who 
maketh  all."  , 

Simple,  but  most  important  confession  !  dnN^he  dfirk  side 
of  which  all  the  passages  are  found  upon  whicW  mate/ialists 
rely;  while  on  the  other  one  pregnant  sentence  at  Jfeast  is 
read,  which,  to  do  justice  to  the  Old  Testament  preacher,  we 
should  look  at  a  little  closer  than  we  have  done : 


*  "  This,"  says'Mr.  Roberts.-'  is  one  of  Mr.  Grant's  (we^fill  not  say 
deliberate,  but)  staring  [?  startling]  perversions  of  fact.  Solomon  (fid 
not  sa5',  who  knows,  in  reference  to  the  state  ^f  the  dead,  but  in  refer- 
ence to'  (he  spirit  of  man  in  its  living  operation" 

This,  it  must  be  confessed,  is' "  startling. "  Let  my  readers  look  at 
the  whole  passage,  ch.  iii.  18-22,^^  decide.* 

t  Here  the  connectipn  of  the-'*'  way  of  the  spirit "  with  the  growth 
of  the  bones  in  the  womb,  confirms  the  application  of  the  former  ex- 
pression  io  the  human  spirit.  It  is  %hB  dovble  mystery  of  generation 
that  is  Inferred  to,  still  as  ever  unfathomable  to'  man's  science.  We 
know  not  how  the  snti  it,  nor 


spirit  nor  even  the  flfesh  of  man  comes  into  being. 


And  death  is  necessarily  a  mystery,  as  life  is. 


i 


ii  - 


140        FACTS  AND  TU£0UI£8  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

"Then  shall  the  dust  return  to  the  earth  as  it  was ;  and 
the  spirit  shall  return  to  God  who  gave  it." 
.    As  we  have  seen,  men  seek  to  explain  the  "spirit "  here     ' 
to  be  merely  the  "  breath,"  as  they  do  that  which  the  Lord  , 
upon  the  cross  commended  to  His  Feather,  and  Stephen  to 
the  Lord  Himself     Few  simple  minds  will  accept  that  con- 
clusion.    They  will  scarcely  see  the  sense  of  the  return  of 
.  the  breath  to  God,  whereas,  if  it  be  indee<l  tin*  spirit,  such  a 
statement  becomes  of  the  greatest  possible  importance.  '  It 
is  what  litis  the  veil  from  the  life  of"  vanity/' and  interprets 
ils  true  significance.     Tt  is  the  answer  to  the  doul»tful  ques-   ^""^ 
tioning  of  the  former  chapter.     Having  come  to  the  end  of 
human  wisdom   in  the  matter,  *>  the  way  of  the  spirit"  is 
here  revealed;    It  "  returns  to  (to<1  who  gave  it."    And  thus 
there  is  complete   harmony  with  that   "conclusion  of  ihe 
whole  matter,"  which  the  closing  verses  invite  us  to  "  hear," 
"Fear  God  and   keep  His  commandments,  for  this  is  the* 
whole  duty  of  man.     For  God  shall  bring  every  work  into 
judgment,  with  every  secret  thing,  whether  it  be  good,  or   ' 
whether  it  be  evil."  » 

Now  if  that  be  the  conHusion  of  the  whole  matter,  does 
it  look  as  if  the  matter  from  which  ho  drew  tbe  conchision 
ended  merely  with  the  blank  and  silence  of  the  grave? 
Rather,  does  it  not  conclusively  shAw.  that  that   return  of 
the  dust  to  the  earth  "as  it  was,"  is  only  what,  brings  tho 
,  6pmt,-^not  "  as  it  was,"  but  with  the  chanicter  acquired  in 
^  its  earthly  tabernacle,— into  the'  presence  of  the  God  who 
:.  gave  it  I  -^;^^^4^^  ---#^-;.  .- .-.    ./.. ;     ;■  '  '      ,  ,  ^-'-p 

•  -;.Nor  does  this  involve,  as  Mr.  Roberts  thinks,  that  the 
1' judgment  of  even/  work  h  going  on  every  day  as  fast  as 
people  die."  But  we  have  seen  that,  while  the  jifdgment  of  -  fe 
every  work  does  not  come  before  resurrection,  yet  it  is 
when  we  "■  fal^\  that  either  we  are  *•'  received  into  everlast- 
ing habitations,"  or  to  the  prison^honse  in  which  already  the 
soul  has  the  premonition  of  its  doom.  ,ns  the  rich  man  his  in 
hades.  Ecclesiastes  has  no  word  of  resurrection.  Death, 
the  stamp  of^ vanity  upon  everythmg,  is  what  is  dealt  with,      ~~ 


jS-- 


OBjECTIOtfS  F1.0M    inu   OLD   TESTAMEHT.  UJ 

«nd  that  which  all  men's  reasoning  ean  so  little  avail  t. 
.       penetrate   „r  un.Iewand,  faith  makes  known    „  ^11 

beeonjaiirtiiire™";:;::  """"^"'"^  ^""'  --'<"'  " 

I  now  pass  on  to  consider  the  testimony  of  the  Psalms 
Some  ,,a,»ages  a,ld„ced  by  Mr.  Koberis  I  may  betntlt 
with  quoting.     That  "  man  is  lite  to  vanitv    hi  .W, 
^ha,,ow  that  pa.,.,eth  away  "  ,P^.  c..Uvr4tand   Lt  Cfo? 
man,  his  days  are  as  grass "  (Psa  Piii   i^-a      c.  *  ,  , 

those,  which  depict  fhe  br^vitTofm^t  li^rrh  'tl 

Go,r«         ,        "     V  "  '  '*■""  »"'•  •'"■'"•■n'l  thine  for 
Gods  creatures  to  l»  thus  "subject  to  vanity  ••  quteirfe 
,  .-*p  e,,vo  of  what  ,-omes  after  dca.h,  is  a  thing' for    „chT 

iorever,  such   words  as  these  bse  force      Bnt  if  ia  «,    i- 
being  reaiiy  ,„.     p„  ^he  poinUs,  thctvre^k  and  ruin  o^':^ 
first  creation  by  death  coming  i„  «t  ill      Thi! ".  Vk  . 
-lemnity  to  the  brevity  of  I  elnK^^JX  '"" 

1  he  other  passages  arc  mostly  of  similar  character  to 
those  that  we  have  already  looked  at.     That  is  thTy  speak 

pLr  Thur^TM'"  ""'-■"»  through  whirhe 
passes.    Thus,     while  I  hve,  will  I  praise  the  Lord  •  1  will 

cxvi.2),      before  I  go  hence,  and  be  nomore"  {Psa  iLx 
13)  are  expressions  ns;  stronger  th.an  we  have  se™  to  b«^ 

i^h':^r ':;:^^'r '"^^  •-"'  ^«  ^^-^  ~  ^^ 

taugu  tiirheter^H  rert:r 'irb^: " V^' 

they  should  do  so.       •  '  ^^  consistent, 

,       Or  again,  take  Psa.  cxivi:  3    t-  "pnt  „^*  '  . 

prince.,,  nor  in  the  son  of  ma!:  Lho:   h  r  Ts^X;'' 
or  h„  h      ,h         ,  ,„^,,_  ,^  ^^^^_._^^^^  ^_^  h  searth  andt 

rt^at  very  day  h,s  Mo,y„,,  ,„,,„,,.    j, ;,,  „„^  ^J  »°d J 

^far as  he  context  lc..,|.,l,i,..,h„„ghto--tlipe,i!la;e  the 

,  pi''™""'ip"T'-osi„wi,ioh>;^™;^;x.;.fi"dH 


1^1    . 


1 


142         FACTS  AND  TUKOBIB3  AS  TO  A  FUT0BE  STATE. 

them  had  been  made  to  hope,  and  which  the  death  of  hi. 
patron  might  in  a  mom6nt  frustrate  and  cut  off? 
■    rgain,  tire  is  a  somewhat  diifcrent  elass  of  passag^,  as 
Psa  vi  5  •  "  F»r  in  death  there  is  no  remembrance  oi  Thee , 
.  to^hlgrave  (sheol)  who  shall  give  thanks?"  And  aga.n, 
^sa  iv  17)  "  The  dead  praise  not  the  Lord,  neither  any 
rr^dowtinto  silence."     Or  again,   that  Passage  m 
Is^kh  (xxxviii.    18,   19):   "For  the  grave  (sheol)  c«mot 
pit  Thee,  death  cannot  celebrate  Thee,  they  that  go 
Cn  into  the  pit  cannot  hope  for  Thy  th.th;  the  Uvmg 
the  Uvlng,  he  shall  praise  Thee  as  I  do  this  day  :  the  father  to  - 
the.  children- shall  make  known  Thy  truth.  ..„„.. 

kis  may  take  a  little  deeper  looking  mto:  but  only  be_ 
Wise  we  are  so  little  accustomed  to  realise  the  po.nt  of 
le^  <Lm  which  tl,c  pious  Israelite  beheld  these  thmgs^ 
Ttat    'congregation  of  the   righteous"  in    wtech  smners 
:    Totld  not  st^Sd,  which  the  first  psalm  gives  us,  was  what 

TeTooked-  for..  A  day,  as  we  say  f  l^--'r-»,,,Xi  h 
which  righteousness  shall  reign,  and  the  earth  be  filled  w.th 
Z  knowledge  of  the  Lord  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea,  th.8^ 

s  what  his  feithanticifeateli  what  oursdoes;  t"*^."-^    ' 
more  exclu8iveJy,1ror  his  knowledge  of  heavenly  thmgis  was 

ve,;  dl».  to'swell  that  great  halleliJJah..bo.r«^  ™chas 

the  last  five  psalms  give  it  us,  and  m  a  scene  such  ^-^bey 

propUeally  anticipate,  that  were. a  godly  Israehte  s  am- 
Sr    To  celebrate  His  praises  upon  earth,  to  tram  up 
o^ldren  for  the  service  of  His  sanctuary,  to  go  up  to  that 
Cmple  wh*re  the  glory  of  Jeh^ah  visibly  dwAtowas 
""^Acl^"  to  M,r0mn7s  th«b."  say»  Roberts. "  the  knowledge 
-.-  ~  of  the  SpSt  of  Go.1  i,  •  vo,y  dim.'  "    This  is  neither  truth  nor  cand«-^ 
Any  one  can  see  that  it  is  not  a  question  of  the  knowledge  of  4. 
^Wt  of  Ood  at  all,  bnt  of  that  of  those  through  whom  ^o^f'^ 
C  peak.    Plainly  the  full  revelation  of  Christianity  had  ^otoom^ 
De^ih  had  not  hoen  abolished,  nor  life  and  incorruption  brought  U, 
«!«     Such  knowledge  .»u.t  have  been  "  dim."    Still,  if  d.m,  there  « 
1.      "enthelr  language,  nor  do  we  "  treat  *.  Psalms^  he 

, ;°  vatebreathings  of  a  pious  Israelite,"  or  "  refuse  Davd  as  a  prophet. 

QT  "  deny  his  testimony."      '  , 


^ 


Me 


■Ml. 


OBJECTIONS  FKOM  TUE  OLD  TESTAJiENT. 


143 


^ 


> 

B 
1 
). 
O 

is 

le 

» 


With  him  connected  with  every  thought  of  Jehovah  b  praise 
You  see  it  m  that  last  quotation  from  Isaiah  :  'the  lather  o 
the  chUdren  shall  make  known  Thy  truth."  Death  would 
cut  short  that  declaration,  and  make  those  praises  cease. 
Death  could  not  in  that  sense  celebrate.  "  Who  should  give 
Him  thanks  in  the  grave?"     Nay,  the  living,  the  hvmg, 

alone  could  do  it.  /• +u„ 

Beside  which,  inasmuch  as  length  of  days  was  one  of  the 
blessmgs  of  the  law,  to  be  cut  off  in  the  midst  of  one  s  days, 
as  Hezekiah  was  threatened,  argued  with  a  Jew  dmue  wrath. 
And  this  manifestly  adds  its  gloom  to  the  first  and  last  pas- 
sages. While  the  115th  psalm  Is  prophetic  of  ^J^ture  *lay 
when  the  earth  will  be  purified  by  a  judgment  which  will  de- 
stroy  simiers  out  of  it,  and  th^se,  I  have  Me  doubt,  are  re- 

ferred  to  in  |hem.  .  '  „„„, 

But  the  Old  Testament  contains  brighter  and  more  assur- 
ing passages  than  these,  and  with  one  of  these  we  may  close 
t4  chapter :  «  The  righteous  perisheth  and  no  man  layeth 
it  to  heart;  and  merciful  men  are  taken  away,  none  consul, 
ering  that  thi  righteous  are  taken  away  from  the  evil  to 
come.  He  shall  enter  into  peace :  they  shall  rest  in  t^eir 
beds,  each  one  walking  in  his  uprightness"  (Isa.  Ivii.  1,  2). 

Now  as  nonentity  is  "  rest,'St  may  be  "  peace,  too,  to 
Mr.  Roberts.  For  we  have  seen  the  "king  of  terfors 
■  sometimes  putting  on  very  attractive  forms.  But  those  who 
camiot  qmte  give  up  Scripture  language  as  "nmeanmg,  nor 
put  bitter  for  sweet  or  darkness  for  light,  will  be  unable  to 
'accept  such  a  conclusion.  As  well  might  the  "second 
death  "  itself  be  everlastmg  peace.   „ 


*«. 


.  k  '-^T. 


ttHiWH 


144        FACTS  ANI»  THE0BIE9  AS  TO  a'fI^'UE  STATE. 


CHAPTER  XTV. 

'  i  -   ■    . 

SHEOL,  HADES  AND  PARADISE. 

".We  are  now  to  consider  what  is  indeed  bnt  a  8econd.ary 
point,  but  one  wBich  will  help  to  give  completeness  to  this 
sketch  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  of  the  soul's  immortality. 
The  word  «  hades  -  (M/,  Autli.  vers.)  is  found,  as  we  have 
already  seen,  in  the  story  of  Lazarus  and  the  rich  man.  The 
representative  of  the  word  in  the  Old  Testament  is  sheol 
"  Paradise"  is  found  in  the  Lord's  reply  to  the  dying  thief, 
^d-  in  2  Cor.  xii.,  where  Paul  tells  us  he  knew  a  man  m 
Christ  caught  up  into  J'aradise. 

The  interpretation  of  these  words  by  the  materialistic 
section  of  amiihilationi^J.  writers  is  pretty  uniform.  Hades, 
they  say  (and  of  course  sheol),  is  the  grave.*  Paradise,  for 
most,  the  place  of  blessing  on  the  restored  earth ;  necessa- 
rily,  therefore,  having  nothing  to  do  with  an  intermediate 
state,  nor  existing  at  present,  for  a  man  to  be  caught  up  mto. 
Mr.  Constable  and  others,  no  doubt,,  dissent  from  this  in 
favor  of  its  being  a  place  in  lieaven,  in  this  more  Scriptural 
than  those  they  hail  as  co-workers  in  this  cause.  • 

To  becrin  with  sheol.  It  is  a  word  apparently  derived 
froifa  shaal,  "to  ask,"  and  is  generally  supposed. to  derive 
its  meaning  from  the  insatiate  way  in  which  death  cOntmu- 
ally  "demands"  its  victims'.  Some  have,  however,  sug- 
gested, what  seems  at  least  as  prolKible,  that  it  is  defived 
rather  fronl^e  "  questioning  "  as  to  the  dead,  as  in  Job 
xiv  10 :  "  man  giveth  up  the  ghost,  and  xffhere  is  he  i 
Sheol  is  acknowledged  to  be  the  equivalent  of  hades,  and 
.  its  significance  seems,  from  the  only  probable  derivation,  to 
be  the  ''unseen,"-^the  invisible  world,.,  as  people  sometimes 

but  still  luides 


♦  Rfr.  CongUh^'docs  not  couleiid:  f6r  tln!»  absolutely, 
for  him  nas  to  do  with  the  bo<ly.  as  we  shafl  see. 


..'f 


SHfiOj.,   HADES    AND    PARADISEV 


145 


say.  It  applies  undoubtedly  in  ordinary  Greek  to  the 
region  of  departed  spirits,  an  application  with  "which  the 
Pharisaic  use  coincides,  as  th«  treatise  ascribed  to  Josephus, 
bears  witness,  whether, it  be  his  or  not:  and  to  this  the 
Biblical  use  in  Luke  xvi.  (even  to  the  term  "  Abrahaip's 
bosom  ")  exactly  corresponds.  Now  we  have  seen  that  not 
only  was  it  impossible  for  the  Lord  to  adopt  without  re- 
mark a  niej-e  superstitious  and  pagan  notion,  but  that  Paul - 
also  professed  himself  a  Pharisee  on  kindred  points.  From 
this  persuasion  no  denuniration  of  heathenism  or  oi  Phari- 
saism idHHJllJ  force  to  tuni  us.  Neither  the  one  nor  the 
other  UPP^  untrue,  and  Pharisaism  was  "at  least  more 
orthodi)X  than  the  Sadduceism  to  which  in  many  points  the 
annihilationist  belief  conforms.  y 

'  That  "hades"  should  have  a  wider  application  thai 
is  no  wonder  from  what  we  have  seen  to  be  its  meaning.  , 
But  although  it  might  be  used  in  other  connections  figura- 
tively, \n  relation  to   man  it  has  one  very  uniform  sense. 
That  sense  is  never  the  gra^•e,  as  they  allege,  although  the 
imagery  of  the  grave  may  very  naturally- be  applied  t^t. 
It  ^nevertheless  demonstrably  distinct  and  stands  in  the 
sao^ relation  to  the  soul  as  the  grave  to  the  body.     The 
common  coupling  together  of  "  death  and  hades  "  illustrates 
this,  for"  in  such  a  conjunction  as  "  death  and  hades  delivered 
up  the  dead  that  were  in  them  "  (Rev.  xx.  18),  death  natur- 
ally stands  connected  with  the  lifeless  corpse,  as  hades  (the 
unseen)  does  with  the  soul  or  spirit.     So  similarly  the  quo- 
tation as  to  the  Lord  in  Acts  ii.  27,  "  Thou  wilt  not  leave 
my  soul  in  hades,"  refers  to  the  soul,  as  *'  neither  wilt  Thou 
suffer  Thy  H^ly  One  to  se^  corruption  "  does  to  the  body : 
'  and  the  apostle  Pqter  distinguishes  them  accordingly  in  his 
interpretation  :  ''  his  soul  was  not  left  in  hades,  neither  Ms 
^  ^/i- did  see- corruption." 
,  This  accounts  for  eight  out  of  the  eleven  passages  in  which 
hades  is  found  in  the*  New  Testahient.     That  in  Matt.  xvi. 
18  can  present  no  difficulty.     It  is  borrowed  very  likely 


I  ' 


I 


I 


!l;lS  AXD  a?HEORiE&  AS  TO -A  FJUTCTJifi  STATE. 


t 


■  k- 


*  .... 


146 

'  ■ »    ■       ■ .  ■  x»    -  ■■  .■ 

be^  rather  "the  gates.  6f  slieoL"    The  two  remaixiing  paH- 

sages  are  really  one:  "Thou,  Capernaum,  shall  be  brought 

down  to  hades."     Here  .the  word.is  used  tropically. 

Tile,  ilst^;^of  sheol,  though  similar,  is  somewhat  more  ob- 
scure. TJhis  results  from  the  character;^  of  tjje  Qld  Testa- 
ment,", which  has  been  noted  and  accounted  foi;.  Itjs  quite 
natural. t,hat  materialists  should  use  it  for  their  purposes,  as 
they  do,  although  after  all  with  yery  poor  success.  Psa. 
^Yi.  10  we  have^  seen  quoted  and  applied  by  the  apostle. 
Jaqdb '  B|(eaks  of  going  down  to  sheol  to  his  &on  J6seph\* 
and  this  has  singularly  little  force,  if,  a  going  down  to  non- 
en.tity.  Jf  we  compare  David's  w'ordp  of  his  child  similarly, 
"  I  shall  go  to'sbim,  but  he  sljall  nit  re^turn  to  me,"t  thi^  is 
greatly  strengthened.  "  .  ' 

'  ^  Then  'we  have  such  expressions  as  the  '^'  depths  of  sb^ol  "^ 
(Prov.ix.  18),  "the  lowiest  stiebl"  (Psa.  Ixxxvi.  13,  Deut.' 
xxxiif  22),— m  tha  last 'passage  God's  wrath  being,  said  to 
burn" to  it,— ** though  they  dig  into  sheol"  (Amos)  ix.  2), 
;which  show  that  the  grave  cannot  be  the  >vholc  matter  there. 
So  even  in  sheol  (Psa.  cxxxix.  SjTthere  is  no  escape  from  the 
presence  of  God  :  ".  if  I  make  niy  bed  in  sheol,  behold,  Thbi; 
art  there!"     Can- that  be  nonentity  ?  '  ■ 

Surely  we  may  be  excused  then  from  following  very 
closely  the  dissertations  of  thoste' whg  have.learnedly  endeav- 
pred  to  prove  that  sheol  is  'the  ||bode  of  dead  sheep,  ot 
men's  jbones,  and  of  weapons  of  war ! .  For  the  first  state- 
inent  there  is  one  passage  produced,  Psa.  xlix.  14 :  "  Jjike 
sheep  they  are  laid  in  sheol;  "  as  Delitzsch  expresses  it, 
^*  they  are  njiftd'e  to  lie  down' in  sheol,  like  sheep  in  a  fold." 
This  one  comparison  of  the  wicked  lying  down  in  sli^ol  like 
a  '^ock  of  sheep,  Mr.  Constable  thinks  sufficient  to  show, 
"  to  the  astonishment  and  disgust  of  our  Platonic  divines 
and  thinkers,  that  beasts  j^o  on  Heath  to  hades  ^''!  ^ 
.  In  the  same  way,  Psa.  texli.  7,  "  Our  bones  arc  scattered  at 
the  mouth  of  sheol,"  is  made  ifi  assure  us  that  "  the  bones 


N 


*  Geh.  xXXvii.  3;" 


t  2  Sam.  xii.  23. 


m. 


t    \ 


.  _  i, — -. — _ 


*.l 


\ 


.>.  SHJSOI.,  HADES  AND  PABADIgfe.        i         147 

ofth^derfire  consigned  m  death  to  hades!"    Thepsalm-'. 
ist  plainly  says  they  are  oftfairfc*  -      •'    '  ™  PMlm- ; 

_  Bjr  others  the  imagerj^  of  Ezck.  xxxii.  27  is  pleaded  to 
^wthatpepplego  down  to  sheol  witll  their  w^l^o^^  ^f  . 
war    and  the.r  swords  laid  under  their  heads!    NLif 
J^bsjfeaksof  hringing  his  grey  hairs  dow*;,?.  sj^w  to  . 
sheol  we  are  bound  to  believe  that  sheol  is  the  abode  of ' 
•   f„7  kT  t?  '    ^  Korah  and  his  compa^go  driwn  ilive      :■ 
into  sheol  the  earth  swallowing  them  up  aliv! ;  JTl^u, 
proof  conclusive  that  men',  bodiesio  to'bades  H  We  hay"     " 
seen-rrT  "r":  ^^"^--V.o/ -.^er^  like- ...the  X 

•    Titne  fail,  us  to  pursue  tbese  phantoms,  and  yet  of  suoh 
-sort.s.tJ.e  r«.„„i„gf„„^  »  th,>„st  .laborateX'^ 
-  tTXTo  hI"™- '.'^^  'I""'-  •  *''•■  '*nst«ble'Jtrolap-      , 
.  weakest  and   most ,  inconclisive  in  It.    And  ha  seemi  in 
measure  Wiou.  of^it.]^  Kanx^toa^pW  into"hem      • 
all  h,s  pnor  Arguments  aTto  the  nature,  of  man;  persoriaUtV 

bett  tJr"     -   °-?"^'"'  t»^  ■»"-  Wnably     ■ 
believe  that  the  coqsciousnejs  of  the  fntermediate  Slate  has 

been  fully  and,  mdepeudently  established  iy  the  tetts  we  '^    ' 

havtexaminsd:;    And  while,  if  s,ul  is  iolj,  hades  m»t  of    '  ' 

thrsTu    t'    'l!"^.''^  ""y.'"'  «tin«tion,.if  on  the  other  hand 

the  soul  be  a  l.v^ng.^ntity  separate  from  the  mere  bodilv 

orgamsm;  there  ea«  be -no  question.  A.t  it  is  not  t*e 

.first;  there  need  be  none,  that  it  is  no^the  other     But' 

je  tave  y^t,an  argument  or  two  of  Mr.  ^nstabfe's  to  con- 

bv'^ml'"'  T^^"  tl^'we  nake  hades  "  a  •la^d-bf  ;«/.  » 
bj  makmg  ,t  the  refceptacl*  of  men's  soul,  after  death.  '  I 
can  «,.y  say,  we  do  not  ordinarily  j„^. it  «,  be,t  In 
thjs  sensej_mean^tbat  although  it  bcTRe  that' 


■A 


j;^_j£meihat  the.  spirils 


f     '. 


:  *  '2  ■  "■  '^'^'  ^^o,y^the\v  l^opes  ^^^^y^F^^^^^m^ 


well  says, 


f 


'ri. 


'  •li? 


n\f. 


148     jTagts  anjj.  theories  as- to  a-jutubb  state. 

of  the  dead  are  Irving;  they  are  nevertheless  the  spirits  of. 
the  had;  and  .#e  necessarily  and  rigfitly  fip^ak  of  h^des  as 
the  abode  of  the  dead.  To  us  they  are  the  dead  :  though 
not  extinct;  and  to  God  t^ey  live.  It  is -not  a  fact  that  we 
find  Miy  difficulty  in  a  uise.of  language  which  perplexes  Mr. 
ConSble.  It  is  Writers  of  his  class  w^ojiaving^  invented  a 
new  language  for  lis  would  fain  persuade  us  it  is  what  we 
have  been  ignorantly  using  all  along. 

The  only  thing  that  might  be  judged  a  real  difficulty  as 
to  hades  we  shall  consider  after  we  have  briefly  loo*ked  at 
the  third  term,  "  Paradise." 

The  greatest  importance  tftat  the  word  has  in  this  conije^- 
tion  is  from  our  Lord's  use  of  it  in  flisreply  to  tb§4ying 
thief:  "Verily  I  say  unto  thee,  to-day  thou  sbaOt  b^  with 
■Me  in  Paradise."  ;..■  ■■■;'.''    '       y'     :'  ^    '':■■ 

The  common  method  of  dealing  with  this  text  is  by  alter- 
ing the  punctuation.    They  would  h^ve  us  read  the  Words, 
"Verily  I  say  unto  thee  to-dm/>:  thou  shalt  be  with  main 
Paradise."    That  is,  "  to-day,  this  day  of  my  humiliation,  I 
say  to  thee."    But  the  order  of  the  words  in  the  sentence  is 
^  all  against  them.     With  the  emphasis  they  give  it,  6ti/^epov 
"to-day"  should  precede  the  verb.     As  compare  In  the 
Greek,  Matt.  xvi.  3;  Mark  xiv.  30;  Luke  xix.  6,  9;  Acts 
xiu  33;  Heb.  iii.  7,  15.     But,  beside  this,  the  I^ord  is  an- 
swering a  prayer  in  which  a  time  wherein  the  thief  sought  to 
be  remembered  was  expressed.     He  had  said,  "Lord,  re-' 
member  ihe  toheyi.  Thou  comest  in  Thy  kingdom/'     The 
Lord  says  virtually,  "  You  shall  nOt  wait  for  \h&V.  to-day 
^  you  shall  be  with  Me."    This  is  the  simple,  intelligible  reason 
tor  the  specificatioaof  time:  "To-day,"  not  when  I  come 
merely,  "  shalt  thou  be  with  me  in  Paradise."  , 

,  Seeing  this,  others  would  render  dijuspov  "  in  that  day,*| 
or  (as  for  instance  Mr.  Constable)  more  exactly, "  this  day," 
but  meaning,  "  the  day  of  which  you  have  spoken."    <'• 
Mr.  Constable  believes  we  cannot  dispute  his  right  to 


-^^i>-" 


^  translate  it  thus,  and  he  quotes  Parkhurst  and  Scl^euRner  to 
*"  thatieffect,    We  have  no  quarrel  with  the  lexicographers  on 


'SiH.. 


\- 


::>.' 


8HE0L,    HADES    AXD    PARADISE. 


U^ 


r. 

* 

,-J 

s'    '■*-- 
It    y 

% 

c- 

g   . 

^  . 

■      , 

\h 

ir- 

in 

I 

■*    , 

■itf* 

m\ 

^ 

ov 

» 

he 

% 

;t8    ' 

mf 

to 

re-' 

he 

«?/ 

!on 

me 

this  point,*  but  must  contend  nevertheless  that  their  wit 
ness  is  insufficient. ,  For  whilie  the  word  may  well  be  ren- 
dered "this  day,"  it  cannot  be  as 'referring  to  a  day  not  pres- 
ent whm  the  word  is  spoken.  In  this  way  it  is  the  exact  • 
equivalent  of  our  word  "to-day,"  which  we  know  is  incapable 
of  such  use. 'Let  Mr'.,^dbnstable  produce,  if  he  can,  the 
passage  which  would  bear  this  construction.t  ,t 

MjT.  C,  seems  evidently  not  easy  himself  about  this  con- 
clusion.' He  vacillates  between  this  construction,  and  his^, 
strange  idea  of  "synchronism."  He  thinks  it  may  well  be  * 
after  alljihat  "to-day'.'  might  reallv  mean  so,  because  ^'to 
the  sleeper  m  death's  arms  thete  is  no  time,  "•  and  having  ex- 
pired before  the  end  of  that  Jewfch  day,"  the  last  half-hour 
[of  it]  the  penitent  thief  will  ^nd  witti  his  Kiog  in  His 
kingdom,  for  it  is  there  ho  takes  up  the  thread  of  time  once      ' 


more.' 


*  Although  Liddell  and  Scott,  as  high  authorities^^demur  to  the  6  6t  r 
at  the  heginningof  the  word  having  anything  to  do  with  the  article 
and  for  a- Very  satisfactory  reason^)  that  "the  word'  is  Homeric, 
and  therefore  prior  to  the  usage  of  the  article."  \  They  only  give 
the  meaning  "  to-day,"  to' which  Dawson's' Lexicon  adds,  "  this  very 
day-"        -      ■     .■.:■■-::'    ^'V:    ..;•    '    ■• "      ..  ,.,         ', 

f  Dr.  Thomas'  reading  is  perhap^  the  strangest,  and  I  meptiou  it  only 
as  a  proof  of  the  perplexity  into  which  wrk^r§  of  this  class  aie  thrown 
by  the  passage.     "'To-day'  i*9  a  Scripture  term;  and 'raift  be  ex- 
plained by  the  Scripture  use  of  it. '  In  the  Sacred •Writii'^,  then,  the 
tenuis  used  to  express  a  period  of  oter  2,000  years.   'Thjs  use  of  it 
occurs  in  David,  as  it  is  written,  '  To-day,  if  ye  will  heaf  His  voice,* 
harden  ^ot  your  hearts,  letlt  ye  enter  pot  into  my  rest.'     The  apostle, 
commenting  on  this  passage  about  1,000  years  after  It  was  written,  says, 
'  Exhort  one  another  while  it  is  called  to-day.'  .  .  .  Thus  it  was  called, 
to-day  when  David  wrote,  and  to-day  when  Paul  commented  on  it. 
This  to-day  is  however  limited  both'to  Jew  and  Gentile ;  and  in  deflninT 
this  limitation  Paul  tells  us,  that  to-day  means  '  after  so  long  a  time: 
.  ...  If  then  we  substitute  the  apostle's  definition  for  the  word  '  to-day  ' 
in  Christ's  reply  to  the  thief,  it  will  read  thus  :  '  Verily  I  say  to^hee  ' 
after  so  long  a  time  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Paradise  '  "  (Elpis  Israel 


pp.  54,  .5.5). 
But  he  is  evidently  afraid  that  will  not  answer,  and  so  is  careful  to 

.  ■■  ■'■■■-        ,1  ■ 


,   ■■;■.  .^'^ 

■    "<    ■"-  ■ 

■  ,    *  "^  _--\  ■ 

'♦ 


160        FACTS  AND  THEQKIE8  AS  TO  A  FUT1][RB  STATE. 


,V 


That  is,  "to-day"  may  mean  two  thousand  years  heniJ* 
or  so,  if  only  you  can  get  t^e  "sleeper  in  death's  arms"  to. 
sleep  quietly  enough  to  be  unconscious  of  the  interval ! 

Mr.  Roberts  agrees  with  the%rmer  of  these  two"  asser- 
tions, that  "  to-day  "  means  "  this  day  ''-^he  day  of  Chrbt> 
coming.  And  he  is  one  of  a  class  of*  writers  who  urge  that 
Paradise  is  in  the  new  earth,  and  theref<>re  not  yet  in  exis- 
tence, which  of  course  would  dispose  of"  the  passage  eflTec- 
tually  as  far  as  applies  to  any  teaching  concerning  an  inter- 
mediate state.  Mr.  Constable  too  urges  that  we  falsify  the 
Scripture  teaching  as  to  Paradise.  I  shall  therefore  briefly 
state  tehat  it  furnishes  about  it.  ,  •        di 

"  Paradise  "  is  an  Eastern  word  for  a  "  parlc "  or  "'pleasure- 
grounds."  The  Hebrew, 7?arrfe»  (DnnS)  is  only  used,  Neh. 
ii.  8;  Eccl.  ii.  5;  Sol.  Song  iv.  13.  It  is  there  translated 
once' "forest,"  twice  " orchard."  It  is  not  used  for  the  gar- 
den of  Eden  in  Hebrew,  but  there  it  is  the  ordinary  word, 
gan  (M),  •  for  "  garden."  The  Septuagint'  translation,  how- 
ever,.g^ves  here  ^ra/3ad£trfos  (paradise),  which  is'  uniformly 
the  word  It  uses  for  the  Garden  of  EHen,  or  of  God,  except 
in  one  place  where  the  usual  word  folr  garden  {xijitofi  is  used. 
From  th6  Septuagint  use  of  the  word,  the  New  Testament 
use  is  dqiiibtless'  derived.  It  does  not  follow,  however,  that 
it  will  iiave  exactly  the  same  application.  Rather,  we  shall 
.find,  the  Old  Testament  word  becomes  in  it,  as  commonly 
"such  words  do,  transfigured  into  a  higher  meaning.  The 
Old  Testament  type  becomes  the  New  Testament  antitype : 
the  "  shadow  of  good  thing^to  come  "  emerges  into  the  sub- 
«tantive  realty.  It  is  used  but  thre6  times : — 
,    Luke  xxiii.  43.— "To-day  thou  shalt  be  with  me  in  Paradise." 

2  Cor.  xii.  4.--t"  How  that  he 'was  caught  up  into  Paradise."  \ 

Rev.  ii  7.^-"'The  tree  of  life  which  is  in  the.midstof  the  Para- 
dise of  God."  „        ' 

in  the  last  of  these  passages  the  mention  of  the  tree  of 
life  connects  itself  plainly  with  the    after  account  of  the 


give  other  interpretations  of  the  pasisage,  even  though  contradictpry  of    , 


this. 


r   ' 


SHfiOL,  HAiXES   Al^    PAUABISB. 


161 


heavenly  Jerusalem'  which  is  therefol'e  at  least  not  t&e  new 
earth,  however  related  to  it  it  may  be.     Nor,  does  this  in' 
the  least  deny  the  earthly  promises  prodjaced  by  Roberts, 
Each  have  their  place,  but  those  he  quotes  are  distinctly 
those  belonging  to  Israel  nationally,  as  the  apostle  of  the    ■ 
Gentiles  tells  us  (Rom.  ix.  3).     Our  blessings  ire  "  in  /i^ay-< 
€;^ places  in  Christ  Jesus"  (Eph.  i.  3);  and  of  these  the 
earthly  ones  are  ttut  the  shadow.     Mr.  liobi^rts  calls  this 
an  unproved  assertion.     It  is,  however)  as  definitely  certain 
as  can  ^e,  and  without  understanding  it  tb^re  can  be  ,no 
proper  understanding  of  the  promises  at'alL    'We>4|A&ll  de-  - 
vote  a  chapter  to  this  |ioint  hereafter,  and  therefore  may 
leay€r'it  now.^  ,  \ 

The  second  passage  speaks  of  paradise  aa  existing  novf , 
for  Paul  was  caught  away  into  it, — I  have  no  wish  to  retain 
the."  up"  if  Mr.  Roberts  objects,-7-and  whether  in  the  body - 
^  pr  otlt  of  It  lie  conild  not  tell,  even  at  the  time  he  wrote. 
ManifesUy,  if  he  8iq)posed  he  could  be  caught  away  bodily 
into  it,  be  supposed  it  to  be  an  existing  place,  and  the  plea 
that  it  was  a  vision  will  not  answer.  The  "visions  "  doubt- 
less  refer  to  what  he  saw  there.  -__  ' 

To  this  Roberts  answers  ^hat  Paulraight  have  puj^posedf 
Paradise  "made  actually  existent  ic>t  Xka^  occasion  of  his  in-   " 
spection."     The  restored  earth  actually  existent  for  Paul  to 
see  !     It  is  a  trite  remark  that  faith  is  never,  so  credulous  as  . 
unbelief  *  "   ^ 

Mr.  Constable  insists  that  this  Paradise  could  be'np  part 
of  hades,  and  that  pepple  are  forced  thus  to  suppose  that 
there  are  two  Parsfdises  !  I  agree  with  him  that  it  is  one  and 
the  same  Paradise  throughout.  And  the  difficulty  which, 
he  supposes  is  only  the  fruit  of  people  studying  rabl)inic£itl 
theology  more  than  Scripture.  Mfides,  as  is  acknowledged, 
is  but 'the  "  unseen,"  and  never  defines  precise  locality.  It 
is  the  attempt  to  make  it  definite  which  has  coul'osed  peo  ' 


pie's  minds,  that  is  all. 

But  hades  is,  in  the  "heart  of  the  earth,"  says  Mr.  Oonstar 
ble.  '  How  does  he  know?    Why,  the  earth  swallowed  upl 


•  I 


•  V 


Il  -.- 


U  L 


152        FACTS  AND  TOEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTU^IE  STAfE. 

Korah  and  his  company,  and  they  "  went' down  alive  into 
Bheol."  That  is  his  proof.  May  we  not  equally  say  that 
hade^  is  the  belly  of  a  whale,  because  Jonah  says  that  he 
cried  "  out  of  the  belly  of  sheol  "  V  Thus  it  is  not  so  easy 
perhaps  to  decide  the  question  of  locality.  The  necessarily 
vague  thought  of  Jthe  "  unseen "  refuses  such  limitation. 
.  True,  its  imagery  was  naturally  borrowed,  before  the  fuller 
revelation  had  been  given,  from  that  grave  wit)*  which  it 
necessarily  was  associated  in  the  mind,  and  thus  you  have  it 
pictured  as  ''  beneath,"  souls  going  down  to  it  or  coining  iip^ 
from  it.  There  is  moreover  a  real  truth  in  this  conception, 
in  its  being  a  descent  from  man's  position,  a  degradation  from 
his  natural  place  on  earth.  The  New  Testament  removes 
fpx  the  isaint  the  veil  of  the  unseen.  He  departs  to  be  with 
Christ,  and  Christ  is  not  in  the  heart  of  the  earth.  The  very 
name  of  /mdea  for  the  believer  almost  disappears,  and  thus 
it  is  most  beautifully  at  the  Cross  of  Christ  that  the  veil 
begins  to  lift  decidedly.  "  With  me  in  Paradise  V  "may  well 
be  in  contrast  with  Old  Testament  utterances.  Alas, 
that  men  should  refuse  the  consolation,  the  brightness  of 
the  new  revelation,  and  seek  to  retain  the  darkness,  for  faith 
passed  away. 

In  a  kindred  way  is  to  be  explained  the  saying  of  the 
Lord  after  His  resurrection,  that  He  was  "  not  yet  ascended 
'  to  His  Father.''  Mr.  Constable  with  others  holds  that  that 
is  inconsistent  with  the  thought  of  His  having  been  in  Para- 
dise in  the  intermediate  state.  But  "  ascension"  is  anotljer 
thing  from  the  departure  of.  the  spirit  to  God.  It  is  con- 
nected with  the  victory  over  death,  not  the  submission  to 
it.  David  is  not  ascended,  while  his  body  remains  in  the 
grave.  And  for  the  Lord  how  easy  to  see  the  unspeakable 
difference  !  The  departure  of  the  spirit  was  the  witness  all 
had  been  stooped  to,  death  in  its  full  reality  undergone ; 
ascension  was  the  witness  of  that  work  accepted,  and  man 
as  man  brought  into  tne  new  place  with  lirod.  ~^ 


mmm 


■Ws" 


THE  AUmoailY  A.ND   USB  OF  SCBIPTUKE.  153 


U 


PART  III.— -THE  ETERKAL  ISSUES. 


CHAPTER   XV. 


THE   AUTHORITY   AND   USE   OF   SCRIPTURE. 

Hitherto  we  have  been  considering  the  arguments  of 
only  a  section,  although  a  large  and  important  section,  of 
those  whose  views  we  are  examining.  We  are  now  to  look 
at  the  final  issues  of  life  or  death  eternal.  And  here  there 
are  two  classes  of  objectors  to  the  common  views :  those 
commonly  called  "  annihilationists  "  on  the  one  side,  but  who 
prefer  for  their  views  the  designation  of  "  conditional  immor- 

'  tality  " ;  and  those  who  on  the  other  side  advocate  the  doc- 
trine of  the  possible  or  actual  salvation  of  all  men,  after 
whatever  ages  it  may  be  of  purificatory  suffering. 

Of  necessity  our  examination  of  these  opposing  statements 
will  lead  us  in  very  different  directions ;  they  unite  only  in 

I  maintaining  the  doctrine  to  which  is  generally  given  the 
Scripture  title  of  the  "  restitution  of  all  things,"  and  in  cer- 

J  tain  ethical  arguments  against  the  ordinary  views.  The 
stronghold  of  the  first  class  of  writers  they  believe  to  be 
in  the  texts  which  speak  of  immortality,  and  of  eternal  life 
£fe  the  portion  of  the  saved,  and  of  death  and  destruction  in 
various  forms  of^xpression  asthat  of  the  ivisaveH.  The 
stronghold  of  theilfcter,  so  far  as  they  take  Scripture  as  their 
g^und  of  argument,  is  found,  as  they  believe,  in  the  texts 
which  speak  of  the  reconciliation  of  all  things,  and  in  the  ex- 
pressions for  "  eternal "  being  not  really  equivalent  to  "  ever, 
lasting."    As,  however,  we  desire  to  take  up  not  merely  the 


arguments  of  those  who  differ  trom  us,  but  to  show  the 
Scriptural  view  from  Scripture  itself,  and  as  the  full  bearing 
Qf  its  statements  needs  to  be  consideredir.  and  not  merQ 


^m 


vn^        -^^ 


f 


FACTS  ANP  OTE0BIE8  AS  TO  A  FUTDRE  STATE. 


ielected  and  isolated  texts,  the  conaideration  of  these  will 
liecessarily  render  it  the  only  satisfactory  course  to  meet  the 
various  arguments  from  whatever  source  as  Incidental  to  the 
examination  of  the  Scripture' doctrine  itself*.  This  only  I 
believe  will  suffice  him  for  whom  Scripture  has  its  due  place 
and  authority,  as  ^chat  alone  can  decide  in  a  matter  of  this 

..-         ^    ^'"'*-     The  truth  will  th^s  be  continually  before  us,  and  our 
.  -  -    .;.    souls  bo  kept  in  the  presence  of  Him  whol^  given   it, 

rather  than  in  the  presence  of  human  thoughts  and  question- 
ings, which  can  b^  but  this  after  all.  ^  f 
^  '  I  do  not  shrink  ft-om  the  ethical  inquiry.  But  for  this  we 
must  have  first  of  all  the  distinct  statement  of  the  doctrine 
.  before  us,  and  then  also  Scripture  itself  must  test  the  ethics 
as  all  else.                                                                           ^&^ 

■'^■■■■■1 

It  will  be  worth  while  then  in  the  first  place  to  consilS^ 
the  authority  of  Scripture  in  this  subject  of  so  immense  im- 
portancc  to  us,  and  which  involves  not  only  our  views  of  the' 

eternal  destiny  of  men,  but  of  the  character  of  God  Himself. 

And  the  question  pf  its  authority  embraces  another,  of  what 

is  authoritative:  is  it  the  text,  the  "letter"  of  the  word,  if 

.  you  will,  or  is  "it  what  some  call  the  "Scriptures  of  God  in 

their   broad  outlines  "in  contrast  to  this:-'    To  which  of 

these  is  the  appeal  to  be  ?     Are  we  after  all  only  likely  more 

to  lose  our  way  by  any  minute  examination  of  the  words  of 

Revelation?     Is  the  danger  in  too  close  a  scrutinv  or  too 

-  :-      little?  - 

For  it  has  been  asserted  by  a  recent,  but  vefv  well-known 

writer*   that,  because  « we  are  in  the   dispensation  of  the 

Holy  Spirit'— "our  guide  is  the  Scriptures  of  God  in  their 

broad  outlines;  the  revelation  of  God  in  its  glorious  uni- 

•  ty;— the  books  of  God  in  their  eternal  simplicity,  read  by 

^     ^^        T-th^^  Spirit  of  Christ  which  dwelleth  in 

•  us,  oxee])t  we  bo  reprobates.     Our  guide  is  not,  and  never 

shall  j>o,  what  the  Scriptures  calP  the  letter  that  killoth;>— 

V     the  tyrannous  realism  of  ambiguous  metaphors,  the  asserted 

r    4  infellibility^ofjisolated  words^  It  is  true  he  tells  us  he  is 

S^r\  r  7  7      *  Canon  Farrar:  8e!-inons  on  "  Eternal  Hope,"  Serm.  3.  ~"  — 


^mf 

'•W' 


'w^ 


THE  AUtI^OBITY  and   USE  01?  SOBIPTI^BE,  156 

"quite  content  that  texts  should  decide *'  this  question ;  but 
then  it  is  only  "  if,  except  as  an  anachronism,  wo  m^an  noth- 
ing when  wc  say,  *I  beKeye  in  the  Uoly  Ghost';  if  we 
prefer  our  sleepy  siiibbdr^nWud  dead  traditions  to  the  liv- 
ing promise  '  I  will  dw«yi"m  Ifcera  and  walk  in  them,' "  so 
that   at  that   rate  wp\^[4aUji  g6H^  at  manifest  dis- 

advantage, and  witli  UtUo^^k^ie  it  should  seem  of  any  sati 
factory  result.  ,  >^  ,'.  .      i<|te  ,  *      . 

There  is  some  little  difficulty  in  meeting  objections  whicB 
from  their  nature  tend  to  deprive  us  of  the  very  au- 
thority by  which  albue  Ave  can  decide  them.  For  if  we 
should  remind  Cainon  Farrar  that  the  apostle  tells  us  that 
the'  things  he  spoke  were  not  in  "  the  wards  which  man's 
wisdom  teacheth,  but  which  the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth,"  and, 
that  it  seems  strange  to  make  the  Holy  Ghost  to  be  in 
conflict  \vith  His  own  "  words," — he  might  answer  us  that 
wo  were  doing  now  the  very  thing  he  objected  to,  and  set- 
tling the  mattet  by"  an  appeal  to  isolated  -'Uexts.""  •  / 

The  only  encouragement  to  such  an  aMMH  seems  to, be  in 
this,  that  he  hir/ifself  so  appeals.  He  himsen  beireves  in  the 
.promise,  "  I  will  dwell  in  them,  and  walk  in  them,"  and 
cannot  include  this  among  the  "  sleepy  shibboleths  and  dead 
traditions  "  of  whidi  he  speaks.  Moreover  he  believes  at  . 
least  that  "the  letter  killeth."  Therefore,  it  should  seem 
that  we  might  examine  his  own  proof  texts,  and  see  how 
far,  if  indeed  he  base  it  upon  these,  they  justify  his  position. 

N^ow  it  is  the  same  apostle  who  vouches  for  his  very 
.♦'words  "Ajeing  taught  him  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  who  tells  us 
that  "  the  letter  killeth" ;  and  if  we  would  not  have  that  in 
the  worst  sense  an  isolated  text,  a  phrase  wrenched  from  its 
context  and  appl/^td  hap-hazard  as  we  please,  we  must 
inquire  a  little  wh&t  its  context  is.  We  shall  find  the  words 
then  in  his  s€»cou(l  epistle  to  the  church  at  Corinth  (Hi.  6); 
and  with  the  verse  preceding  it  runs  thus :— ^ 


"  Not  that  w<4  are  sufficient  of  ourselves  to  think  anything 
as  of  ourselves/  but  our  sufficiency  is  of  God,  who  also  hath   ^ 
made  us  able  ininisters  of  the  New  Testament;  not  of  the 


t 


"TfW^ 


« 


ill' 


166 


FACTS  ANP  TdEOBIES  A3  TO  A  PUTlTRSl  STATE. 


letter,  but  of  the  spirit;  for  the  letter  mileth,  hut  the  spirit 
giveth  li^.^  .  \ 

Jf  wo  look  back  to  the  verses  going  beforq,  we  shall  find 
that  ho  has  boon  cojitraHtiiig  the  writing  on  "  tables  of  stone" 
with  the  writing  of  the  Spirit  of  the  living'  God  "  in  fleshy 
tables  of  tffe  hcar^t."     If  we  goon  to  the  verses  following, 
\vo  shall  find  him  speaking  of  the  former  as  "tie  ministra-'* 
lion  of  (Imth,  written  and  engraven  In  stones,"  given  to  the 
children  of  Israel  by  Moses,  and  of  the  latter  again,  in  con- 
trast, as  "  the  ministrat^n  of  the  Spirit."    And  in  the  next 
verse  again  he  styles  the  one-"  the  ministration  of  condemna-^ 
tiorifthe  other  "the  ministration  of  righteousness."    We 
need  not  follow  him  further. 

Upon  the  face  of  this  then,  the  apostle  in  "  the  tetter  *' 
that  "  killeth "  is  speaking  of  thfe  "  ministration  of  death*' 
and  that  as  what  was  written  ^pon  the  "tables  of  stone," 
fhehifn  and  nothing  ehc.    It  is  this  that  he  is  contrasting 
with  the  "new  testament,"  or  gospel,  as  "the  ministration 
of  righteousness"  and  life  by  the   Spirit.     The   law,  the 
letter,,  killed:  was  designed  by  its  manifestation  of  what 
God  required  from  man  to  gilve  Tiim  the  sentence  of  death  in 
himself.     "When  the  commandment  came,"  says  the  apostle, 
speaking  of  its  proved  effect,  *''' sin  revived,  and  I  dikV 
(Rom.  vii.  0).     The  gospel  on  the  other  hand  "ministered 
righteousness"— provided,  not  required  it,  and  so  was  life 
to   souls,  not   death.     In  the  one  "the  letter"  of  a  mere    ■ 
commandment  i^killed."    In   the  other  the  poW^r  of  the 
Spirit  wrought,  giving  life.     Pa^il    was  a  minister  of  the 
"New   Testament,"   not  the  Old,   "not  of  letter,  but  of 
Spirit."  - 

But  then,  I  fear  me,  Canon  Farrar  cannot  b^  acquitted 
of  the  grossest  violation  of  his  own  precept.  He  Is  in  real- 
ity using  "isolated  words,"  woi:ds  isolated  fr^m  tte#  con- 
text and  applied  to  establish  principles  with  which  they  have 
not  the  remotest  connection.  He  uses  them  to  put  in  oppo-  ' 
s.tion  the  words  which  the  Holy  Ghost  taught  and  the  Holy 
Ghost  who  taught  them ;  and  to  substitute  for  adherence  to 


..^iMiL,  il-; 


itlh  AUTHOUITY  AND   USE    OP  SCRIPTUEE. 


iht 


the  inspired  text  a  sort  of  mystic,  living  guidance,  which  r^' 
nounces  the  Scriptures  as  having  any  mere  verbal  accuracy 
to  be  adhered  to^^.t^ie  asserted  infallibility  of  isolated 
words  "—and  replaces  this  with  "  the  ScriptMres  of  God  in 
their  broa^oittlines^Jiot  to  be  too  narrowly  defined ;  "  t"he 
revelation  of  God  in  its  glorious  unity,"  untrpubled  by  the 
discordance  of  "isolated  texts";  pratotically;  anything  that 
we  may  please  to  call  the  teaching  of  the  Spirit  and  the 
word,  not  to  be  critically  tested  ^ven  by  that  word  by 
which  the  Spirit  teaches.       /  f 

On  the  other  hand,  ice  have  been  taught  that "  hereby 
know  we  the  spirit  of  truth  and  the  spirit  of  error,"  not  by 
any  assurance  of  our  own  hearts,  as  having  the  fulfilment  of 
the  promise,  "  I  will  dwell  in  them  and  walk  in  them," — 
true  and  blessed  as  that  promise  is, — ^but  as  "  hearing "  or 
"  not  hearing  "  the  men  inspired  of  God  tp  give  us  Scripture 
(1  John,  iv.  6).  We  have  learnt  by  the  conduct  of  the 
Bereans  to  "selarch  the  Scriptures  daily'"  whether  theSe 
things  are  so.v  And  from  the  apostle  of  the  Gentiles  that 
the  "very  words "^  he  gives  us,  isolated  or  not,  are  words 
taught  of  the  Holy  Ghost  Hinaself. 

Canon  Farrar  does  indeed  allow  us  to  "  decide  by  texts 
alone,"  but  it  is  only  if  we  prefer  "  sleepy  shibboleths  and 
dead  traditions "  to  the  living  guidance  ^L  the  Spirit  Him- 
self. Is  the  word  of  God  a  "  dead  tfljution "  ?  I  will 
gladly  believe  rather  that  he  cannot  mean  this.  But  then 
his  words  do  wrong  to  his^  meaning,  and'  we  have  no  giiide 
to  the  latter.  I  quote  from  the  appendix  to  his  book  an- 
other statement  of  his  views,  possibly  more  calm  and  delib- 
erate than  that  from  the  sermon  in  thafcody  of  it : 

"I  caro  but  little  in  any  controversy  for  the  stress  laid  upon 
one  or  two  isolated  and  dubious  texts  out  of  the  sacred  literature 
of  fifteen  hundred  years.  They  may  be  torn  from  their  context ; 
they  may  be  distorted  ;  they  may  be  misinterpreted  ;  they  may 
be  irrelevant ;  they  may  b^  misunderstood  ;  tJiey  may — as  the 
prophets,  and  the  apostles,  ^ind  our  blessed  Lord  Himself  dis- 
tinctly intimated — tJiey  may  reflect  the  ignorance  of  a  dark  age,  or 


■A, 
* 


¥': 


158       PAOtS  AKD.  THBOBlEfl  AS  TO  A  JTJTtJttE  St^m. 
the  fragment  of  a# imperfect  revelation  ;  they  may  he  a  6ar«oo«.' 
.e..u>ntoimpe,:rect^<^<^  ^  stepping-stone J^  firogres,,     Wt 
the  Bible  teaches  as  a  whole ;  what  the  Stbles  aho  teach  as  a  • 
whole-for  History  and  Conscience,  and  l^ature  and  Experience, 
these  too  are  sacred  books,  that,  and  that  only,  is  the  immutable  ■ 
law  of  God."  '  .    . 

4^it  i8  very  plain  what  Dr.  Farrar  ^leaits  by  refusing 
the  "infalUBllity  of  isolated  words."  ,  For  him  there  are 
many  Bibles,  all  Mible  alike,  and  he  himself  is  of  these 
fallible  Bibles  the  only  apparently  infallible  interpreter.    His- 
tory  is  such  a  Bible^  written  where  and  iiow,  out  of  all  the 
contradictory  tomes   to   which  every  day  is  ^ving  fresh 
birth,  he   does  not  say.     Conscience  is  another,  though  it 
teach  men  to  bow  down  to  stocks  or  stones^,  or  Snakes  and 
crocodiles;  conscience,  wTiich  made  Saul. kill  God'asaiiils to 
do  Him  8^'vice.     Mature  is  still  another,  with,  p^chance, 
a  Huxley  or  a  Darwin  as  its  chronicler,  and  expounder.     Ex- 
.  perlence,  which  proved  to  the  Jews  of  Jeremial^^y,  that 
While  they  burnt  incense  to  the  queen  of  heaven,  fhfey     had 
plenty  of  victuals,  and  were  well, 'and  saw  no  .§vil,"     AH  , 
these  are  Bibles,  upon  whose  imperfect  and  contradictory 
utterances  the  mind  of  man  is  to  sit  in  judgment— to  decide 
what  it  can  receive  an<f  what  reject ;  and  the  blessed  word 
of  God  is  to  take  i^s  place  among  these,  and  man  is  to  say 
which  of  its  utterances  is  the  "reflection  of  the  ignprance 
of  a  dark  age/'  and  Vhich  "  a  bare  concession  to  imperfec- 
tion," and  which  "a  low  stepping-stone  to  progress.^ 

We  may  thank  Dr.  Farrar  for  his  candor.  It  is  certainly 
well  to  know  what  Scripture  is  for  bim,  and  how^  far 
"  texts"  are  likely  to  decide  the  matter  in  question,  ^^here 
he  finds  that  prophets  and  apostles,  nay,  the  Lord  Him- 
self, sanction  his  view  of  thf  matter,  it  would  be  hard  to 
say  There  is  certainly  abundance  of  proof  of -the  very 
opposite,  and  >  the  mouth»of  on^  who  professes  such  un- 
bounded confidence  in  the  "  illuminatioa  of  the  Spirit  ot 
Christ,"  it  seems  a  strange  assertion  thatnhus  the  Spirit  of 
trutb  must  have  taught  error,  or^  at  Iciast  have  used  such 


\  (  - 


THE  AUTHORITY   AND  USE  OF  SCRIPTURE. 


159 


feeble  auod  imperfect  mean*  of  confm^eating  troith,  that 
He  could  not  prevent  its  bein^  mixed  up  with  error.    We 
refuse  this  teaehing  altogether.    We  on  the  authority  of 
Scripture  itself  believe!  that  :J*  a//  Scripture  is  gji^en  by  in- 
spiration of  God,  and  is.  profitable  for  doi^^^rine,  for  reproof, 
for  correctioh,  for  instrii^ion  in  righteousness,  that  the  man 
<rf  Giod  inay  be  perfect,,  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good 
works"  (2  Tim.  ill,  16, 1^);.     We  believig  m  a- really  "divine, 
revelation  given  to  us  by  One  .^ho  cannot  lie,  and  who  does 
not  for  bread  give  us  a  stone,  lar  put  d^kness  for  light,  or 
light  fOt  darkness.    %e  would  obediently  "  search  "  these 
Scripturef(   conscious^lfftdeed  of  bur  own  weakness  and 
ignordn<je  ill  doing  so,  but  sWerfilj^trusting  Him,  who  as- 
sures tis  that  "  he  that  wM  do  (lod%  wUl  shys^Uknow  of  the  , 
doctrine  whether  it  be  of  &o|i:"  (JohnTvii.  IT), 

Dt;  F^rrar  speaks  of  **  the4j^rannoua  realism  of  ambigtiOus 
metaphors,'*  of  eoursfe,  the  metaptiorat  of  Scripture.  'And  it 
is  an  objekion  which  we  havi^metbe^re,  and  shall%neet  at 
every 'step  as  we  now  proceed,  tl^  ^e  t(pxt8  that  are  used 
in  this  controversy  arfe  largely  of  tlttS' nature.  Now  the 
ambiguity  of  the  metaphors'  can  only  be  tested  by  the  exam- 
ination of  the  passages  in  questioil :  the  fact,  of  their  being 
largely  metaphorical  aflmits  of'no  doiA|;.  Mr.  Minton  puts 
this  triumphantly  in  his  'published  ^*  Way  Everlasting." 
"Suppose,'?  says  he  to  the  person  he  is  aftidre^sing,  "we. 
agreed  to  wave  ^verytliing  on  either  sidi,  of  a  purely  fig- 
urative character,  whether  parables,  metaphors  or  visions, 
together  with  passages  admitted  to  be  of;;jdoubtful  meaning 
on,  other  ground  than  that  connected  with  the  issue  between 
us,  and  to  abide  by  th^e  plain  prose  statements  that  form  the 
staple  of  Scripture  testimony  on, the  subject — where  would 
you  be  ?    Simply  nowliere.     You  would  be  out  of  court." 

Mr.  Minton's  triumph  is  hardly  so  well  assured;  yet 
doubtless  he  has  some  apparent  reapon  for  what  he  says. 
The  pictorial  representations,  if  I. may  so  say,  of  the  eternal 
state  are  those  naturally  in  which  we  find  the  most  vivid 
images  of  eternal  jud^ent;  and  these  are  preciselj^  thepa^n- 


«5'' 


Wl 


"m 


;* 


A 


¥2 


-:-■■■■    :■    i%S 


■■*'         -tit"-''' 


: 
i 


160        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FDTUllE  STATE. 

sages  which  he  and  such  as  he  have  most  difficulty  in  recon- 
cilinc'  with  their  various  theories. .  The  book  of  Revelation  ; 
especially,  the  prophetic  panorama  of  things  to  qomc,  gives 
them'cspecial  trouble.     The  eternal  torment  spoken  of  there^ 
Mr  Minton  candidly  confesses  his  mability  to  explain  in  aiyr 
way  quite  satisfactory  to  his  own  piind.*     But  the  "highly 
fiemrativc"  character  of  these  visions  is  the  conslaut  plea, 
ami  they  cdn  refuse  upon  this  ground  whutthercannot  ex- 
plain.    To  maintain  the  authority  of  texts  iSke  thescvis  just 
to  assert  that  "  tyrannous  realism  of  ambiguous  metaphors    ^ 
a-ainst  .whichlbanon  Farrar   utters  his  protest,     ^et  the 
book  has,  as  few  have,  its  inspired  title,  and  that  title  is -the 
Recelation  of  Jesus  Christ."     It  is  as  if  the  complamts  of 
obscurity  and  ambiguity  had  already  reached  the  Divine 
ears  from  out  the  unborn  future,  and  He  had  provided  for 
them  ^h  the  assurance  of  Kv^.beimj  a  revelation,  a  true  un- 

'    folding'of"  things  to  come  to  pass."     I  would  ask  thcm^  to 
mark  this,  that  it  is  here  they  find  their  greatest  difficulty, ' 
in  what  Christ  calls ///.s '•  Revelation."!  .  ' 

Jfche  figurative  character  is  confessed,  but  it  is  only  what 
is  found  wherever  eternal  things  are  pictured  to  us.  There 
seems  no  other  way  of  their  being  set  beforeHs  indoe.l,  than 
by  figures  taken  from  the  things  aroun.l ;  and  we  may  be 
sure  that  He  who  speaks  to  us  in  tliein  lias  taken  not  the 
most  obscure  and  doubtful  way  to  show  them  to  u.s^.  "  AV  a 
see  through  a  glass,  darkly ^  sap  the  apostle.  The  last 
phrase  is  literally '^ in  an  enigma ''  (I,  Cor.  xiii.  12,  ;/*(t/V/.). 

«  Thus  it  is  the  Scripture  way  to  use.  enigmas  to  describe 
what  otherwise  it  may  well  be  impossible  for  a  man  to  utter 
(2  Cor.  xii.  4). 

Yet  thoiK'h  it  was  of  old  tlur  compljiint  as  to  the  prophets 

that  they  "  spake  parables  '  (Ezek.  xx.  49),  it  is  nevertheless 

■  _     ,  .......     ^.^-.., :-^— /-.^  ' 

*  Way  Evorla.stiiig,4the<l..  p.  Of>.     r  f^ 

t  For  Mr.  Dobiiov  ihes.-  aro  t}..> "  liiorodyphs  cf  Putmds.       Mr.  Oox 
would  exclude  fr.»m  the  .lecisien  of  tlrrs  question  not  ouly   "J^^yo\^ 

all  \ho  01(1  Testament  (Salvar 


bul  llie  parablfis  of  the  Lord,  and 


lion, 

tor  Mundi,  ch.  ".)• 


-v-^--^'  ---■ 


•       » 


ili>IJlLlHl*ti|iMH  ' 


•\.^ 


THE   AUTHORITY   X^I)    USE   OF;  SttRIPTUKK.  161' 

expected  of  disciples  at  least,  that*  they  should  understand 
them.  «  Know- ye  not  this  parable?"  asked  the  Lord  once 
of  the  twelve,  "and  how  then  will  ye  know  all  pajalles?" 
(Mark  iv.  13).  Surely  our  shame  It  is  to  be  akin  to  those, 
whd  seeing  do  i^t  perceive,  and  hearing  di?  not  understand. 
Th^  Lord  does  not /trifl^e  with  us,  does  not  mvite  us  to  see 
what  He  forbids  us  to  understand*  And  there  we  must 
pause  for  the  present.  The  visions  themselves  will  come 
before  las' at  another  time. 


M 


^     ^*Aa  lo  tlie  doubtfulness  of  »the  interpretatrbn  of  the  parables,  Mr. 

^Oox  asl^s  of  MatL  xiii.  33,  ^Bd  Luke  xv.  4 :  "  Would  it  ;iot  be-^uite  easy 
to  interpret  these  weighty  and  emphatic  phrases  as  signifying  that  the 
wjiole  inaas  of  mankind  is  th  be  leavened  and  quickened  by°the  truth 
of  ChriW^n<l  that  the  great  Bishop  of  our  souls  will  never  cease  from 
hi*  .luesW)f  any  poor  lost  sinner  until  he  find  him  and  restore  him  to 
the  tbld  1 "  No  doubt  'it  i§  "  easy,"  if  we  assume  the  meaning  ofsym-  ' 
l)ols  as  we  please,  and  tfiishas  been  largely  done;  but  the  "  three  meas- 
ures of- meal  "  refer  to  the  raeat-offem;i^^yith  which  no  leaven  was  to 
l.e,  mixed  (Lev.  ii.  11),  and  cannot  mean  "the  whole  mass  of  mankind  '* 
:M.y  more  than  the  "  leav.en  ''  can  ever  be  int^ppreted  as  good  accordin'cr 
to  Scripture  usage  (Comp.  Matt.  xvi.  6,  11,  12;  Maik  viii.  15  •  1  Cor° 
V.  6-8 ;  Gal.  V.  9).    ^         •  .  v      .     /  ^^    -  '' 

A-ait«pthe  "losg^lheep  is  the  "sinner  that  re^eth/' and- Christ 
<lor.s  find  all  such.  As  to  the  prodigal  ffgurlng  the  return  of  a  soul  from 
i.ell  (the  far  country),  it  i5*^nworthy  trifling,  which  stamnT the  clmrac- 
ler  of  the  map  wh*  uses  it^hink  of  a'sinher^oiHg  aiay  fro*  God 
to  enjoy. hiuiself  in  hell!      ^^  -tfc.   -    ' 


-W^' 


U/^ 

ft... 

•.   *  s'  .• 

■'  "■*        ':     ■■■■  .    : 

_     ^ 

\ 

w    ' 

i 

%€■: 

■  '',      "    "            »    .     ' 

■•,'.■*    ■ 

'■.•*/,.,    ■. 

■  ■    .  ,\f  ■ 

,::   ■-■     :..,  '::■    ■  ,     ■, 

1    ■  :. 

i 

to 

\  -•  • . 

.  ■■  ■   ^* 

■  1."   . 

-  "■• 

.a-*         -. 

• 

V  -.  f      ■■ 

■'"  '    ■  ■, ' ' 

'i 

5 

',    -'^^ 

>.     '"">■--. 

,     ^ 

.,".■■-■  ,  ,....'■;- 

■■     -V                    •                 tp. 

;,V,"/    ■.-.■■ 

'                           k 

."    ■  '■.,'         ■'  *S. 

■■'?-.-^':v' 

•     ..,;■■    •  -    -•-■ 

t 

\ 

■■'•>'''        ■•     .' 

■ 

^'  :■ ,.         ". ,                  '"'■, 

*      • 

V 

'       ' 

,■1    ' 

a* 

'^ 


-X  ..-m 


i|I||]^kie  ii^^^i^r  o\iuniua|iop|s  briefly 
r.  ?^^<?^^'^'*M  "^M^i^  iit.  roiut;»  to  this 


l0ok  at\j>e  prophutle  ■6Utl|41of  the 

the 
eme 
ents 
the" 


■^!^j      .  ;  '  ^  '%W  ^  ^^^^!  ^^g'"  #h   in^r^rtality  und  'eternal-  Jilc,  tw«> 
/  '■%*  %f  ^*"*?«^*^^'  ^»ch  fbi-anhihijfitionists  are  only  one  japKhow- 


^;   ^^  T  H?^^'*  |»«cordant  up  to 'this'!  tinte  jnay  liave  been  t%r'state- 
i  .  .  ;ifl«3Wts,   wt?^  find  them   iii  almost  pei-|ect   a^pement 


i^s 'Mi 'Morris: — ^  •■    '   V      ■  '^^  ;.■      . 

^   YThe  Son  of  Goi],;came  to  give  lifo,  even«etornanif(/;  aiid  if  it, 
^askcd;/AVho  wiUlivo  forever  ?' ■the  ans^wor  of  thdi^rd  and 

f  (  V    '     ^^^^^  ^^  ^^^'  who  is  also  the  Bi^'otHfe,  is  ;n  these  \  '^^*' * 

*'     that  leateth   of  this   bread  shall  live  forever.'     Am 
,    itrey^j^^n^  and  evil  f or^^  man  to  say,  that  In 
the  Soil  of  Gqd  tlie  '^fJH^^ife  '  does  not  mean  1 
words  '  eternal  life '  (wH^  mean"  eternal  life,  an 
'»    *  shall  live  forever ;  do  not  mean  shall  live  fore\ 
their  ecii^siastical  teaching*,  certain  men   are  hu^. 
kind  of  irreverence  and  evil  by  reason  of  thek  ha 


the  false'doctrine  of  the  innate  and  essential  irAtnortf 


of 

hat  thp 

le  T^^ords 

KyruiJ,  in 

■*^  tliis 

>pted 

^hrf 


eartlUy '  race/'^o  , 

And  at  the  othttr  end  of  atimhilationism,  the  follower  of 


Ur.  Thomas,  Mr.  iioberts  of  Birmingham,  aftgr  q*uotlhg  va 


*"-Wlinf  i^  Arnn  ? '•  p.  4aps 


1 


i    ■». 


■  ~-        W^.  ■      I 


•1 


''tTT' 


l-HMORTAUTY  :    IS    IT   CONIHTIONAL  ? 


168 


%: 


I    % 


"t 


rioua  passages  which  speak  of  eternal  life,  writes  (Twelve 
.  jbectares,  p.  82) :  ♦ 

.  "  KbV,  if  immortality  bo  the  uatunil  iittribute  of  eveiy  son  of 
^dam  from  th<^  v.uy  moment  ho  broatlios.  jvlmt  can  be  the  mean- 
ing of  testimonies  like  these,  which,  ono  and  all,  speak  of  immor- 
.tality  as  a  liituro  eoutingoncy,  a  thing  to  l)o  sought  for.  a  reward, 
a  thing  to  bo  given,  a  thing  brought  to  light  through  the  gospel 
etc.  ?  Tiiere  is  an  uttoi-  incongruity  in  siieh  language,  if  immortal 
ity  b;'ii  natural  and  present  possession.  How  can  you  promise  a 
man  that  whicli  is  already  his  own  ?  The  divine  promi.se  is, 
that  God  will  award  eti*riud  life  to  those  who  seek  for  gloryj  honor 
and  immtn-tahty  ;.  and  this  is  the  strongest  proof  that  human  na- 
ture is  utterly  destitute  of  it  at  ijre.sent." 

Tminortality  and  eternal  life  are  here  confounded!  And 
it  does  not  make  it  bettcrthat  Mr.  Roberts  quotes  apparent 
Scripture  to  justify  the  confusion.  He  may  shelter  himself 
iinder  the  fact  that  he  is  not  alone  in  it.*  He  is  not;  but 
that  will  nfit  make  him  h-ss  responsible  for  deception,  even 
^  unwit«mg^«spractised.t 

The  true  Scri2>tural  statement  is  this  :— 
;     In  the  New   Testament  the    true  A^^ord  for  immortality 
^d^ocvaciia)  occurs  but  three  timers :  1  Cor.  xv.  53,  54,  "this 
mortal  must  put,on««m/>/-;f/%;"  "  vvhen  .  .  .  .this  mortal 

''^^t^i^* W<^^''*^''^"^''^ '  '  ^*"f^^nce  of  God  it  is  as- 

^^^F^^f^vilp),  that,  He  •'  only  hath  hnm.mality:' 

,T^adjectiVc;|iim|o^ar' does  not  even  occur. 

therein  ijigindt^>dauoth«-  Vni  %tphtharsla    {dtp^apdia:) 


t#ice  translated  ni  our  v#8ioii*^^Vwit5#aLttyv'ani  that  is 
the  wor'd  Mr.  Rbberts>ith  othe^  l\as  caiight-at  as  showing 
va^ssGeffim/  it;  but^ts  propq^^  lueaning  is"*'  incorruption,'' 
and  so  it  is  niostly  translated.  .  I  cite  all  the^  passat'es : 
Btffii.  ii.  7  :—*'  glory,  honoi-  and  ^■»M^wW4y.J 
42r-"iti3raiR*^  ''*'" 


«Vf.v 


■V 


1*^ 


(Joodvv 


obney-  Hastings,  H^m^^Moiicriel  Z.  Campbell,  Minton, 
Gonsiablo,  all  agree  with  hun.     No  doubt.  oth(^r3  also. 


tile  takes  tip  notice  of Jt  ^ven  ^n  his  review  of  rhy  book,  after  its 
bein^plainly  pointed  out  (o  him.     :ftut  this  is  no  unaccustomed  thing 


f»'  ymmi.  V 


^^ 


W 


\ 


^^■'-v 


n^'^. 


164         FACTS  AND  THfitoRIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

1  Cor.  XV.  50  : — "  uoither  dotli  corruption  inherit  incorrupt imC' 
t  53  :— "mustpiit  on  ywror»*»7)^/o«." 

54  ;_"  sliall  liave  put  on  incorrupt  ion.'" 
Eph.  vi.  24  :— "love  our  Lord  Jesus^Christ  in  sincerity.'" 

2  Tim.  i.  10  :— "brought  life  and  imrnortali ft/  to  light  by  the 
gospel."  ' 

Tit.  ii.  7  :— "  incorruptness,  gravity,  «*/"v?r/7y." 

Its  adjective,  apht/iartos  {a<pOotproi)  "  incorruptible,"  is 
used  seven  times,  and  applied  towod  (Rom.  i.  23,  1  Tim.  i. 
17);  the  crown  of  the^  righteous  (1  Cor.  ix.  25)}  our  in- 
heritance  (1  Pet.  i.  4) ;  the  word  of  God  (1  Pet.  i.  23) ;  and 
once  figuratively,  "  that  which  is  not  corruptible  "  (1  Pet. 
iii.  4).  It  is  only  once  in  our  version  (1  Tim.  i.  17)  rendered 
"immortal,"  but'  with  no  more  reason  than  in  other  places. 

Furthermore  its  opposite  (^a/>ros)  "  corruptible,"  is  six 
.times  found,  and  always  so  rendered:  Rom.  i.  2-^:  l/Jor.  ix. 
25;xv.  53,  54;  1  Pet.  i.  18,  23.  *  ,,^ 

The  difference  between  these  words  comes  out  in  1  Cor. 
XV.,  in  which  they  are.  all  to  be  fomid.  Speaking  of  the ' 
dead  body  of  the  saint  (ver.  42-50)  the  apostle  uses  the 
word  "  corruptible  "  and  "  corruption."  It  was  not  mortal^ 
but  dead.  Then,  speaking  of  the  resuVrection  of  those  "  that 
are  Christ's  at  His  coming  "  (ver.  23),  he  brings  in  also  the 
change  of  the  living  saints  which  would  accompanj^  it ;  "  We 
shall  not  all  sleep,  but  we  shall  all  be  changed ;  "  "  the  dead 
shall  be  raised  incorruptible,  and  we  (the  living)  shall  t)e 
changed;  for  this  corruptible  (applying  to  the  dead  l^aint§) 
must  put  on  incorrupfion,  and  this  mortal  (applying  i»!  tfie 
living)  must  put  on  hnmortalityJ^  ;*     »? 

Thus  there  is  evident  distinction  in  the  use  of  thesei^ords 
in  Scripture;  and  when  it  is  said  (Rom.  ii.  7)  that  God  will 
render  "to  them  who  by  patient  continuance  in*well-doing 
seek  for  glory  and  honor  and  incorruption,  eternal  life,"  it 
is  not  at  all  the  same  as  seeking  for  immortality,  but  the 
— blessed,  incorruptible  state  in  which  resurrection  or  the 
ige  "  will  put  the  samts  at  the  coming  of  Christ.  And 
68  only  to  the  saints,  as  the  whole .  descriptiop  'i\\ 


'^f[ 


: .   ■   I 


i 


.■^ST. 


immortality:  .i,s  it  ookditiokal? 


165 


: :    I 


! 


-4i_-. 


?5f. 


Im- 
Im- 


1  Cor.  XV.  4:2-50  doefl.     The  wicked  are  not  tliose  of  whom 
it  is  said,  "It  is  sown  in  corruption,  it  is  raised  in  incorrupt 
tion ;  it  is  sown  in  dishonor,  it  is  raised  in  glory ;  it  is  sown 
in  weakness,  it  is  raised  in  power.'"     Such  words  aye  appli-. 
cable  alone  to  the  bloom  and  beauty  of  the  "  resurrection  of 

.  life-''  -  . 

"'^^uite  tjue  that  th^  saints,  alive  but  mortal  when  Christ. 

comes,  will  then  got  "  immortality."     The  liability  and  ten-" 

dency  to  death  will  in  their  case  be   of  course  removed. 

But  that  word  is  the  expression  of  a  different  fact  from  that 

which  is  pdinted  out  in  the  case  of  those  who, have  died. 

All  will  alike  of  course  possess  incdrruption,  pi^jing  on 

•alike  the  image  of  the  heavenly ;  but  the  fact  iloticed" 

the.liying  is  that  they  shall  not  sleep  at  a^j^"  mortalit 

their  case  being  "  swallowed  up' of  life.''  '  ,' 

For  of  course  mortality  is  our  condition  d6wn  here. 

mortality  "  is  /io<  "  our  natural  and  present  condition." 

mortality  is  deathlessness,  and  who  imong  the  peopk  Mr, 

Roberts  is  opposing  asserts  that  we  do  noft.die?    It  is  a 

poor  quibble  that.     The  ^oul  does  not  die ;  nor  the  spirit; 

but  man  does  surely.     The  question  is  as  to  what„  death  is, 

not  whdtiier  men  are  subject  to  it.     Of  course  v^i%J||p''K- 

it  is  cessation  of  existence,  but  then  that  is  not  what  we  - 

mean  by  death.     We  mean  the  dust  returning  td  the  earth 

as  it  was,  Avhile  the  spirit   returns  to   God   who   gave   it. 

Under  the  same  word  we  are  in  reaUt^y  speaking  of  different 

*Spllijil  Goodwyn  has  indeed  another  application  of  the 
words  in  this  chapter : —  f 

®  "  Ver.  50  applies  the  word  '  corruption '  to  fleiAi  and  blood,  the 
eiAte  natural  man  ;  ver.  52  applies  thfe/word  'incorruptible' 
tolEad  bodies  '  raised. '  In  ve#«3,  therefore,  the  Word  '  incor- 
ruption  •'  evidentlygpapplies  4*Jj|  ^^^^^  *^^  consequently'  im- 

'*  ction,  %rhen  body  and 

cqnt^ting  the  source 

^the  Adam  race, 

•"corruptible  seed, 

remains  that  the  - 


mortility '  t6  tlio  soul,  but  o 
soul  are  rounitod.    *The  ap 
of  the  children  of  God  with 
says  Jdujiil^he  former  ate  'Jjol-n' 
W  3w 


but 


')rruptil'»le, 


'^""""^^^ 


*# 


m 


r-.mt,- 


*•% 


16C         MJ^UIH  AJii}  lUKOUim  AS  TO  A  FlTTUJtE  8TATK,  ' 

latter  are  bom  of  '  oorrnptible  tiu0lf^9l!lS^o  a^pitatl^'Paul  gives 
furthef  force  to  this  expression  when  Ite  says,  'We  that  are 
in  thkn  |kbernacle  do  groan,. being  burdened, not  that  we  would 
be  wSothed '—uncovered  with  a  body— 'but  clothed  «pon, 
tbst  w)iiTAiJT7  might  he  swallowed  up  of  life.'  Hpre  Lh  a  dis- 
ti^tafelertion  that  the  jjersonality — apart  or  not  from  the  body — 
ialp^lal'  (2^or.  v.  4)." 

•|f  boldness  would  carry  the  day  the  field  were  won.  As 
it  is  we  arej^not  convinced.  We  dispute  the  fact  of"  flesh 
and  blood  |  beitig  the  '♦  entire  nj^tural  man  " ;  we  agree  that 
"  incorruptibn  "  everywhere  applies  to  the  body.  T^giieny 
the  "consequence  "  that  mortality  or  immortality  refers  to^ 
t%^ul.  l^ijefers  to  the  bodies  of  the  liviuf/  when  Christ ', 
dwmes,  as*  corrtlption  and  incorruption  to  the  bodies  of  the 
dead.  Let  any  one  compare  1  Thess.  iv.  15-17,  where  the 
same  event  is  spoken  i!Df,^ri%  where  the  dead  in  Christ,  lid 
'•  we"  who  ate  alive  aqd  retnaio  are  (Similarly  contrasted. 
ITie  "we  shall  tti|han^  "  fs  WDntrist^  in  1  Cor.  xv.  52, 
with  the  dead  bei^  ''raised  incorruptible,^'  and  so  similarly 
in  the  next  ^etse,  ^is  corruptible  "  appUes  to  the.  Jeaf/, 


f.?! 


9inDns  toHhe  body, 
FH^28,the«iiicorrl 


eafpresE 


_)tible 

MchJl^  the  gospel  is  preached 
ddlwith  the  physical  consti- 


ar 


"  4ilis  mortal  t  to  'We'^iying  : 
the  ''tnortaljies/i,"  (?  Cor.  iv. 
Again,  in  the  passagefrom 
s^d"  is  the  "word  of  Go 
uiito  yp]^."     What  „  has  tha 

tu«Ofl  or  man?  iUia  if  wdSire  bom,  as  I  have  no  wish  to 
enyi  of  "  corruptSle  seed,"  how  does  that  show  that  such 
»|^  a  term  applies  to  the  physical  constitution  of  the  soul  or 
spirit  ?  Nay,  he  has  himself  just  now  applied  "  corruptible  " 
to  the  condition  of  the  body,  and  "  mortal  "^m  contrast  with 
this  to  the  state  of  T-he  soul.  /Neither ^ssiiftiption  can  bear  the 
least  examination.  '  » 

The  quotation  from  2  Cor.  v."  4  is,  howler,  still  more 
recklessir  misapplied.  WAere  is  the  ^  assertion  that  the 
personality,  a;?qr^  froni  the,  hody,  is  iportal"?    It  ts  Gen 


• 


<n 


% 


V 


m 


'*r 


Goodwyn's  own,  not  the  apostle's.     He  has  distinctly  stated 
that  h«  groaned,  not  to  be  unclothed,  but  clothed  upon. 


IMMORTALITY  :    IS  IT  CONDITIONAL  f 


167 


'%] 


\ 


Now  this  is  the  very  change  of  the  livmg  we  have  before  been 
looking  at.  Paul,  the  living  but  mortal  man,  longed  not  to 
be  unclothed^to  be  apart  from  the  body— Z»m/,  iu  opposi- 
tion to  that,  to  be  cj^thed  upon,  that  mortality,  his  present 
condition,  might  bdPWallo wed  up  of  life. 

How  could  the  "personality,"  apart  from  the  bodt/,  be  ac-' 
cording  to  Gen.  Goodwyn,  *'  mortal "  any  more  ?    Would 
he  call  a  dead  body  mortal  ?    And  for  him,  apart  from  the 
body,  the  soul  is  as  strictly  dead  as  is  the  body  itself. 

-Mr.  Roberts  makes  an  eflfort  to  show  that  immortality  and 
ililorfUptiofa  are  interchangeable  terms;,  and  we  will  allow 
him  to  state  how  in  his  own  words :  . 


t: 


*  Tho  first  [dOayadia)  tells  xm  that  the  life  cf  the  uge  is  death- 
ss.  Ig^^  entering  it  we  are  told  that  this  mortal  shall  put  on 
ortality.  By  this  we  know  the  truth  declared  by  Christ,  that 
ley  who  are  accounted  worthy  of  tho  ago  .  .  .  cannot  die  any. 
more'  ^uko  xx.  36).  But  how  is  it  that  life  is  thus  mado  endless 
to  those  that  were  before  but  mortal  ?  The  second  word 
^a(pOap6ia)  answei-s  it :  '  Tliis  corruptible  must  put  on  incorrup- 
tion' (IGor.  XV.  53).'  Men  ore  mortal — liablep^^i^ath — because 
their  natures  are  cnrritptible  ;  they  decay,  ^^^flpke  them  in- 
corruptible, and  endlessness  of  life  is  the  ncc^^^consequence. 
Hence  to  seek  for  iucon'uption  is  equivalent  to  seeking  for  death- 
lessuGss  or  immortality." 

.Mr.  Roberts'  physiological  knowledge  is  as  defective  as 
bi%^  knowledge  of  Scripture.  I  have  already  pointed  out 
that  his  theory  of  life  being  the  result  of  organization  is  the 
very  reverse  at  least  of  what  the  acutest  physiologists  of  the 
day  assert.  Prof.  Huxley,  well  known  to  be  as  stout  a  ma- 
terialist as  he  is  undeniably  an  unbeliever,  admits  over  and 
over  again  that  life  is  the  cause  of  organization,  and  not 
organization  the  cause  of  life.  (Introd.  to  Classification  of 
Animals)  I  have  before  quoted  from. another  of  the  same 
school.     It  is  almost  the  universally  accepted  doctrine  no^^ 


— Mr.  R.'b  present  assertion  is  but  the  logical  outgrowth  of 
his  former  one.  If  life  be  the  result  of  organization,  doubt- 
less immortality  will  be  that  of  incorruption.     But  as  the 


..■'#-'' 


m- 


n 


168         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKK  8TATK.  -    ! 

former  statement  needs  to  be  reversed,  so  will  'the  latter 
require  to  be.  Incorruption  will  be  based  rather  upon  im- 
mortality, but  even  so  is  not  (as  it  wouhl  appear)  its  nieessary  - 

Result.  We  must  bear  in  mind  that  we  are  speak in<^  here 
of  what  is  almost  outside-  the  sphere  of  mere  human  know- 
ledge, and  where  a  verse  or  two  of  Scripture  is  aU  the 
Biblical  material  to  «lraw  from  either.  Hut  all  that  we  do 
know /is  against  the  view  Mr. -Koberts  advocates. 

Th^  "  immortality  "  as  a  term  is  applie.l  in  Scripture  only 
to  thei  righteous  is  not  of  striking  force  wlien  wo  remember 
that  i*  is  only  applied  to  tkeui  in  two  consecutive  verses 
(1  Cor.  XV,  .'iH,  r)4),.one  of  which  is  but  really  the  r»>]>etition  . 
of  the  other,  / 

]Jut,  say  these  writers  (quoting  1  Tim.  vi.  1<>),  ••  (Jod  **»\r 
hath  immortality."     What  then  ?     Wliy,  it  is  argued,  "  tlicr 

•  soul  can't  have  it.'  Let  them  go  a  little  further,  and  the 
result  will  be  ai)parent.  The  angels  then  cannot  either. 
Does  death  tlien  reign  throughout  the  ranks  of  created,  sin- 
less beings?  That  will  not  of  coin>e  be  contended  for; 
but  it  is  involved  necessarily  hi  the  argument;  and  must 
follow,  or  the, argument  be  given  ii|).  Xo,  s:iys  Mr.  IJob^rts, 
for  the  angels  "  m-e /?o(?  ^<>  «.s' .  for  they  are  of  His  nature, 
and  come  only  «mjlis  erninds '' .  .  .'•  they  are  of  the  divine 
nature  ;  they  are  '  spirit.'  "  .Vnd  so  is  man's  sj)irit  "spirit,'" 
and  we  have  seen  that,  if  angels  be  "  sons  of  (Tod"'  on  that 
account,  just  so  are  men  also '' llis  otlspring.'  Wliatever  ^ 
therefore  this  proTCsasto  angels,  it  proves  also  for  th'e  spirit 
of  man.  That  the  angels  i-cifffaent  God  to  us,as  cruning  oft 
His  errands,  proves  nothing  nor  disproves. 

The  Scripture  sense  of  the  passage  doi'S  indeed^  hutke  it 
apply  to  angels,  and  to  all  created  beings.  It  is  the  esseur 
tial  difference  between  the  Creator  and  all  1  lis  Avorks,  that  lie 
alone  by  Himself  subsists.      *'  liy  Hhn,''''  on  the  other  hand,    • 

'    "all  things  subsist."     "He  upholdeth  all  things  by  the  word 


^ 

< 
"'^. 


V  ■ 


of  His  power."  Thus  we  by  no  means  malritain  whatMr, 
Morris  calls,  and  rightlj|calls,  "the  fidse  d<>etrinp  of  the 
lunate  and  essential  im^^ftality "of  th<'  t-arthly  rsuM'.'     So 


tA- 


i 

■c 


¥: 


■'•    '. '.  ■    .:     "'  . 

'":■■  '..:;_:li 

KTEHKAL    hlFK  : 

WHAT?   18  IT? 

160 

far  from  that  we  contend  that  the  race  m  mortal,  Ra4  that 
immortality  innate  and  essential  belongs  to  no  creature, 
fallen  or  unlallen.  Tt  is  the  a88urance  of  thig  that  this  pas- 
sage? in  Timothy  gives.  In  that  sense,  as  possessing  it  ia 
HimseTf,  (^od  alone  hath  it,  and  in  Hun  '*  we  live,  and  move, 
and  have  otir  being."     "  By  Ilim  ^11  things  subsist."        ~ 

But  this  no  more  proves  that  the  soul  dies,  than  that 
angels  die.  Dependent,  derived  immortality  it  may  have 
ecpially  with  them,  and  in  t/iat'senHii  its  immortality  is 
affirmed;  for  they  that  kill  the  body  cannot  kill  the  soul. 

Eternal   life,  which    t|ioy  confound    with  immortSlity,  is 

a  Mholly  difterent  thing;  and  this  we  shall  now  proceed  to 

show.^  ':.:'■.  --r ,  ■ 

■■.■■.■■•         .)»*-■  ■  .   ■ 


;^.  t 


■ 


CHAPTER  Xyil. 

ETER>fAV  1/IFEr'  WHAT    IS   IT? 


•/, 


It  will  be  remembered  that  the  word  used  in  the  New 
Testament  for  the  life  that  the  righteous  enter  upon  as  their 
eternal  condition  i^  always  the  same  word.  It  is  not  psuche 
biit  zoe.-  .    >^^  ' 

^It  ought  n(i|/tbl^ieedful  to  insist  upon  this  again.  ^  Gen. 
G^odwyn,  as  we  Mv«„4(een,  fully  admits  it,  and  tries  to  make 
capital  of  it  in  his  own  peculiar  way.  As  however  Mr. 
Roberts  lyvs  made,  hi  his  review  bf  my  former  book,  one 
final  effort,  to  overthro\V  this  position,  we  shall  again  listen 
to  his  own  words  about  it.     He  says : —  - 

iF  Just  a.s  we  speak  of  the  pEesoiit  life  under  different  words, 

such  as   lifts  existeuco,  being,   so;  the   future  life  is  varidusly 

;^esignuti'd  according  to  the  relutiou  in  which  it  is  considered.    It 

is  either  ipvxKt  mtd^iM.  xvi.'  25)  ;  Zaytfyti/e  (Mark  x.  30)  ;  or 

mEU.,w,:  \\  ;].(!  TliesH.  iv.  I7);a.^  tlit>  line  of  t.lioiiglif.  d«>man.lB  ; 


•a 


but  the  hope  in  all  ctwcrt  is  absolutely  one  and  the  same.  The 
saving  of  the  i'vxt}  (Hcb.  x.  39),  is  the  obtaining  of  eternal  C«»w 
(Matt.  \i\.  29),  1»y  tlu'  -its'  of  Pnnl's  discourse  (2  Cot,  iv.  H)." 


*S|,»", 


S-   ?"■  ■ 

M  ji  ■ 

■ 

• 

'*  '- 

"r-^' 

M\ 

i  j! 

i 

r  ■■: 

■•    J 


:i^. 


''<<.,«« 


■  • » 


** 


>170         i'AOTri  ANi>  THFOKlfiS  AS  TO  A  FUTUKU  STATi.   . 

I  fe6l  as  if  apology  wer6,due  to  my  readers  for  quoting 
lais  <»r  k)n3\v^  Still  as  I  suppose  it  seems  satisfactory 

id  himself,  there  may  be  others  also  who  need  the  answer." 
ft  may  be  a  «hort  tjne,  When  the  ."  we  "  who  obtain  eternal 
life  are  8tq,tcd  to  be  the  life  that"  we "  dbtahi.  But  atleast. 
you  may  say,"  the  savingof  the  jif^v  is  the  obtainin|g  of  eter- 
1  al  ^>"/  "  is  it  not  ?  I  should  Kuppose  that  proved  that  they 
were  different.  For  certainly  it-' would  not  consist  with, 
t^eripturfe  to  speak  of  '"  the  sawiy  of  thp  Cc^v  '  or  of  the 
'  obtain  in  (/cieiernalrpv  XT)  y  In  Scripture  phrase,  a  .saved 
.man  "keeps  his  psuche  itnto^  eyerl^ting  7.:>e;'  and  these 
"Ihltafs^are" never  confounded  or  reversed.  *Eternal  life  is 
'Mever  psnche.  Mr.  Roberts  would  gladly  produ<:cthiB  paf- 
i<age  to  prove  it,  if  it  could  be  found.         '  i 

Let  it  1)0  remembered  (hen  that  we  are  speaking  of  this 
vone  word  zoo   when  we  inquire  into  the  meaiiing  of,"  ever  > 

lasting  life."  "•  "  /     - 

^  '.And  tirst,  what  then  is  "  life  "  ?     What  do  we  ordinarily 
mean  by  it 't     Mr.  Constable  raises  the  same  question,  and 
answers  it:  and  he  now  shall, tell  what  he  believes  it  means 
Jle  says  (Duration  and  SslU  of  Fut.  Punishment) :—   ^.^ 

•  *  if  wt-  were  only  to  ask  -what  was  its  primnrij  sense,  we  should 
liivo  no  diffienity.^  All  allow  />.rhtencp.to  bo  its  pi-imary.signili  ca- 
tion. We  will  hereafter  show  tliat  the  primary  sense  of  this  term 
is  the,  only  one  ad'mi>3sible  ;  but  here  we  will  not  further  insist 
on  it*!  Wo  will  here  only  ask  if  tliero  wct  :o»^'titrirers(il  sense  at- 
tached to  thi.s  terui  ;  so  that  wliile  there  juiglit  be  to  ji  grentcr  or 
l(?ss  extent  a  variat;/  of  sen-ses  attjiclied  to  it  In  one  fluco  t^r  s 
.•;.nother,  still  as  accepted  by  all  luunkiud  speukiug  the  Grecian 
tongue^  had  only  one  sense  which  was  every  >Vhero  acceiitod 
us  a  tlw  sense/and  by  some  accepted  as  the.  only  s(.nse. 
Here,  too,  we  are  able  to  come  to  a  certain  coTicli^sion'.  TJiat. 
sense  of  'existenc/  wliich  is  "undoubtedly  the  pi^i^W  #"^^'>^^'' 
as  undoubtedly  a  sense  accepted  by  every  GiVilMaigpaker  aH^4 
true  sense,: 4intl  By  very  many  Oreciau.speakejj 
only  sense.  Onr  opponents  th"ei?^selves  cannot  atj3^|B not  attempt^, 
to'denythis.  "Y\\Guii^yilifjlttened heathen;  says  Md^fej)n,  '  nijcl^er  ' 
stood  the  terms  life  and  death  as  implying  simple  eristen^  or mmi 


'» 


.•'■   i« 


a.' 


♦ 


m 


■  w 


ETERNAL   LIFE  :  ,  WHAT  IS   IT 


171 


And  Mr.  Constable  argues  therefore  th^t  so  it  must  have 
been  understood,  >nd  meant  to  be  imder^tood,  ,by  thq  Jfeople  § 
to'whoiii  the  gospel  vfaS  addressed,  or  if  i^t,  the  dilerent 
sense  attached  to  it  wo^ld  have  retjuiredi  to  beifexplained  to 
them,;   and      ^    ,  *  ,  *  ^  .       * 


.0 


1^ 


■O 


& 


'**  of  such  explanation  we  do  not  find  a  trace.'  Xyhere'w©  do  « 
findan  inspired  writer  defining  the  meaning  of  '  Ut'e  '-he  defines  f  \^ 
it  exactly  as  a  heathen  would  do  :•    '  "What  is  your.li^e  ? '  saith  the     ^ 
apostle  James.     'It  is  eve^,'  he  replfes,  'a-vappr,  that  apj^eeiieth. 
for  a  little  ittne,  and  then  vanisheth  away.'    Life,  with  St.  i^axnes, 
himself  a  jfow,  meant  bnt  what  it  meant  with  a  heathen,  dxiet 


en.ce.. 


»*■ 


Xi 


•  • 


■«.■ 


# 


Mr.  Cohstable  is  one  who,  beyond  most  of  his  sfi|iooi, 
claims  for  himself  critical' and  precise  accuracy,  and  he  <Shalr 
lenges  answer  to  his  arguments.  ,1  hay^  therefore  so  dften 
chosen  him  as  thi  expoisfent  of  the  views  of  his' own 'class  of 
writers.  But  -we  have  had  already' many  a  proof x)f  his  in-: 
competency  a^  ^  r^^tsoner.  It  may  be  the  result  of  the 
unhappy  system  he  has  taken  up,  which  seems  to  cloud  t^ 
intellect,*a8  it  certainly  enfeebles  spiritual  perception.  Let 
lis  ex^ine  his  statement  however.*  v  .' 

And  here  in  the  first  place,  it,  is  a  little  disap^poiritingto 

turn  to  the  table  which  he  gives  us  further  on  in  his  book, 

■  p       .    .  .•  ■  »  * 

of  the  meanings  of  the  Greek  words  which  be^r  upon  this 
question,  and  to  look  in  vain  for  this  universal  meaning  at- 
jfajhing  to  zoe !'     -, 

.  Hi^  vocabulary .»i|p  from  Liddell  and  Scott,  "  allqwed  to  be 
'  an^iulbority  of  the  highest  order,"  as  he  truly  says.  And 
moreover,  he  says,  he  appends  to  the  words  "  every  meaning  " 
(the  italics  are  his  own)  "  attached  to  them  in  the  ordinary 
Greek  language."  After  giving  it,  he  says,  "we, will  thank 
our  readers  to  look  carefully  at  th^  forfgoing*' tabt^,"     We 

have  done  so,  and  find  as  the  result:— 

...  '  '  ■.  •»         ..  * 

«     ','  Zwrj  (zoe),  1.  a  Uving  or  property,  2.  lite  as  opposed  to  death. 

Zd<0  (mo),  1.  to  live  f%K>ken  ^f  nnimnl  life)  ;  2.  to  be  in^JfuU 

Jifo  and  strength.''-  ./         '  -  ,"' 


m 


'1^;. 


-?r.-  I 


v\. 


"•  ^ 

■^  ■,    .'V  ■: 

' ;  ■  ■*■ 

■-■.»■■ 

/ . " 

''ITViK  [h  rertainly  reni}irkHl>le,     Mr.  Ci>nstabU':'g  /trimat't/.  *                ■      \ 

t 

'   i 

■  ■■'-:;: >?'^  ,". 

■ ..  .  '■  •i           ■-■•                                                     '"  '              .        '    ■•  - 

:■   ,^" 

■*»^-" 

:"';■§  '\^    ' 

•  •       ■■■■■■      :■  •;-:-,::■:>'■■:■'    <  ■    -*-■■.  --.:.*>•■  ,  ■  -  ■   "    -■                      ..-—>; 

'3- 


*X- 


■  ;-V 


172         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.    .^ 

M  universal  sense  of  zoe  is  not  found  iii  a  table  furnished  by 

}  himself,  and  certified  to  contain  "  eyery  meaning  attached  to 
it  in  the  ordinary  Greek  language." 
.  But  this  is  not  all.     Nor  can  we  acquit  Mr.  Constable  of 

<,,  the  gravest  charge  that  can  b#  brought  against  a  contro- 
versial writer,  a  lemling  himself  to  cjeception  of  the,  worst 
kind.  Th^  primary  meaning  he  gives  might  indeed  awaken 
suspicion  by  its  strange  appearance.  Xot  orify;  is  "  life,  as 
opposed  to  death,". the  .wconcAo y  meanihg,  not  the  primary, 
in  his  owti  table;;  but  that  primary  meaning  looks  strangely 
also ;  '^a  living  oHproperty."     What  kind  of  property  ?  aild  ■ 

^why"  living  "instead  of"  Xx^^^y——^^^^-^^^-  j    -  j 

I  turn  to  Liddell  and  Scott  for  explanation,  and   I  find  as, 
follows:^— 

"  Zgj^,  a4iving,  i.  e.,  means  of  life,  goods,  property  ;  '1.  Att. 
life,  cLpp.  to  death."  '  ■  , 

'•A  living,  i.  e.,  >iea^'S  of  life,  goods,  })ioperty  "' :  that  ig; 
the  primary  meapin^.     S(*condarily;>  and  in,  fin:  Attic  dial ci- 1 . 
one  of  the  five  djalects  of  Clrreek,  it  means  'life,  as  opposed 
to  death."        ^'  .  '  , 

How  different   is  the  whole  statement   f)f  the  c*ase  fio 
that  which  he  lias  given  ns.    And  lie le  I  ain  argninj:^  rif)thin<j: 
myself;  I  am  but  giving  his  own  authority. 


WJier 


e  is  "existence"  as  the  universal    nicanini;  of  zoe  '.' 


It  i^  not  found  as  a  mf.inirig  at  all,  e\  en  in  his  own  \ocabu-  - 
lary !    .And  even  the  meaining  of  ///''  as  op[)os(^d  tc>  death  is 
neither  the' primary  meaning,  nor  the  universal,  bnt  only  hi 
the  iJLttic  dialect,  one  division  of  the  Greek  tongue  otft  of 
five.     To  use  no  language  unneces.sarily  harsh  in  the  nratteiv  • 
Mr.  Constable  has  mis-stated  a  very  s^nple  matter  of  fact. 

But  it  is  the  Xew  Testament  use  f>f^the  term  with  whiih 
we  are  concerned,  and  we  do.  not  purpose  carryiDg  the  e.\ 
amination  further^  For  my  OMjn  part,  in  the  case  of  a  com- 
mon New  TesjtJtment  word,  I  am  eoi^ncpd  thjit"  a  Greek"' 
concordance  (that  is,  the  examination  f)fnfe.  word  itself  as 
it  occurs  in  ^>cripture)  is  of  more  value  to  the. Bible  student 
than    the   best    <llctionaiH    that    ever    was.     'I'he  word  /.oe 


*■■   .•*;;■ 


# 


V 


:,i  ■.■ 


;■■-'■  t 


»i 


■.    ht 


■■'   i.       ■ 

■i 

<  •■■'■■  '■ 
,  v:    "■ 


'■■■      r»'^ 


V 


;/  '■■ 


ihi-t. 
osod    -. 


!^,  1 


\--% 


J'"'     • 


'.  • ■ 


ETERNAL   LIFE:    WHAT  IS  IT  ?  .  ITS 

occurs  134  times'in  the  New  Testament,  it  is  in  one  pliofe 
rendered  *' lifetime "  (Luke  xvi.  25);  in  every  other  case  it 
is  rendered,  as  it  only  Could  be  rendered,  **  life." 

And  Mr.  Constable  may  rajise  the  questipn,  if  he  please,    > 
are  not  existence  and  life>but  the  same  thing  ?    I  aniwer,  the' 
question  occupying  so  intently  'the  minds  of  many  in  the 
presently,  w6ul<ihave  no  meaning  if  it  were  so.    We  have 
already  quoted  Prof.  Nicholson  to  the  effect  tHTat  "no  rigid 
definition  of  life  Appears  to  be  at  pre^edt  possible."     I  be- 
lieve from  the  Scripture  point  of  view  indeed  something 
approaphing  a  definition  may  b^  possible,  but  certainly  not 
in  the  crude  way  which  annihilationists  press  with  the  mo8t__ 
extraordinar^iConfidence.     "  Eternal  life,"  says  Mr.  Roberts,   ' 
'  is  in  th6  first  place  life  in  its  pririiary  «en8e  of  being."    Is 
that  the  .prima-ry   sense?    Can  nothing   "be,"  but  what 
''lives"?  'It  is'not  even  the  sense  at  all,' any  m6re  than  is 
existence.  "Croodwyn   contradicts  both  j  he  says  :—"  I  am 
now  prepared  to  add  that  life  dfoes  not  in  Scripture,  nqt 
anywhere  else,  iavariafcly  mea^m^re  existence  ;  but  is  in- 
separable from  a  condition  or  chama^r  developed  by  the 
action  of  the  mind."^  ^^^^'^^^'^0$  "  inseparable '" /rom 
a  certain  '<  character,"  then  ji|!an  never  he  '^mere  exis-  ■ 
tence  "  ;  and  s6  far  .at  feast  th/de^hitipn  is  correct.     Let 
us  examineit.a  littlc^fjl'ther.  ;^ff 

Life  manifests  ifee^^lrjr  ac^:*it  is  th^  "energy  that 
W'ks  the  whole  machinery,  so  ta  speak;  oT  the  being  in  ■ 
w,hich  it  dwells.  But  we  may  also,  and  in  fact  do  more  fre- 
quently speak  of  it  as  the  motion  %i  the  machinery  itsplf, 
The  latter  is  life  phenomenaU  what  it  is  as  subj|ct  to  our 
inspection,  a  matter  of  actual  observation  and  knowledge. 
The  former  is  life  po«en^i«4 the  po^rar  behind  th6  movemejit^ 

and  unseen.  ^  «  • 

But  then  weabo  speak  of  life  in  a-  still  larger  way  as. 
compi-eiiendinj^  the  ^Surse  of  this  active  eadstenqe;  life  as 
furnishhlg  the  id^vidual' A/s«on/.  'And  %3  connected  with 
this,  although  distinct,  we  speak  of  life  as'difforehtiated  % 
its  swrmmdinys  r  fingl.ish  life,  American  Dfd,  and'evcil  with- 


\ 


t 


■*. 


nimm 


.\ 


*■* 


iH        FACTS  AND  THiiOBlES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATK. 

out  an  adjective  at  all,  of  a  young  »man  entering  upon  /(/%, 
^^e  in  the  pregnant  sense,  implying  its  full  tale  of.  hopes  and 
Ijoys,  and  cares  and  sorrows. 

^  '  In  the  sphere  of  merely  natural  things  of  which  alone  we 
are  as  yet  .-^peaking,  the  life  potential  according  to  Scrip- 
ture, is  the  5o?</,  or  psuche. 

2.  Tl^e  phenomenal,  physical,  animal  life  induced  by  the 
presence  of  the  soul  in  th(?  body,  is  also  psuche. 

3.  The  historical   life  is  on   the  other  hand  always  zoe.* 
And —  \-  ■''      ■  '■ 

4.  Zoe,  too,  is  life  in  the  pregnant  Hense,  implying  iill 
tiat  it  introduces  to:  \"7    7~7'~t~7'' 

The   first    two   meanini^s   are   ponWected;   together    and 
covered  by  the  one  word,  psuche,>s  the  last  two  are  on  the, 
other  hand  connected,  and  covered  by  the  one  word,  zoe. 

Of  psuche  enough  has\beer  said  Already.  •  Zoe  usecl  with 
reference  to  the  natural  lifef  occurs  but  thirteen  times  in 
the  New  Testament.  I  give  all  these  occurrences  that  we 
may  have  the  subject  as  fufly  aspossil»le  before  us.        V 

1.  Life  in  the  historicar  sfense  :~  ,,  ' 

'      '  ■      \     ■  .  '■',■- 

Luke  i.  75  :  '■ulltho  days  o'^oiir  hie."      \  . 

xvi.  25  :  "  thou  in  thy  hfi^time  recoivcdst  thy  good  things. "   ' 
Acts  viiJ.  33  •   ^' his  life,  is  takoii  from  the  earth. ''»  .    ,     ■ 

xvii.  25  :  "  he  giveth  to  ad  hfe  and  breath  an^ali' things."   ' 
y.    Bom.  viii.  38  :  "  neither  deiith  nor  life  shall  separate  us."       ^    ' 
1  Cor.  iii;  22  :  "  all  things  are  yours,  whetlier  life  or  death."    *  ' 

XV.  19  :  "  if,in  this  life  only  we  have  hopp  in  Chn'.st,'" 
Phil,  i;  20  :  "  whether  by  life  or  deatl."/-  .    ,-    ■■ ;  '■^. 

1  Tim.  iv.  8;  ^^ having  promise  of  the  life  thtrti^  ,.'  ;. 


*  I  lieave  out  vi  cor^ideration  /^f^^?.  which,  alth.mg'lt  ii  figure.s  largely 
in  ordinary  Greek,  oce^irs 'but  fiVe  Liines  in  ilie  New  Tejitarnent"  in  the 
sense  of  "  life,'.'  and  hero  ahv'aj>  as  a  synonym  of  -<\)e  ip  the  historical 
sense.  lis  use  lies  outside  of  our  present,  •inrj^uiry.  The  five  passage? 
are  Lake  viii.  14;  1  Tim.  if.  2;  2  lira,  y^  4;  I  Pet.  iv.  ^V V Jr»ha  ii.le. 
.  tit  is  strange  that  ^oodwyn  should  say  Truth  and 'Tradition,  p.  18) 
"  In  everi/  instance  where  zoe  j.s  u.^'d  it  \s.  ji]jpliod  to'thf  ♦■tfrnity  of 
Gbd,  of  the  Lord  Je-sut<,  and  of  .believ.vi-s  MHim.'"  this  is  but  one  of' 
th«»  tnanv  ••arelfss  <t.'Uciii<'ri,(.'<  fo-hc  r.iiiini.'.n  ihc  "<■  writc''^     .; 


-f 


^v 


'  ♦  ■ 


•'i 


■^c- 


bVJii^ESfcAX  Hi'ii: 


WilAT   IS   IT*^^ 


175 


iHeb.  t4/»:  *' neither  fegintaiQg  of  day  s^DOT  eild  of  life^ 
:    i^ames  iv.  It :  "for  what  is  your  lif^  ?  it  is  even  a  vapor."  '^ 
^     2.  In  the  pregnant  sense ;  only-  twice,  but  distinct  :— 

Luke  Xiirfe  -^  a  Uiaidi's  li:e  boiisisteth  not'  in  tUe^bundance 

of  thitigs.'"  ,  1  1        » 

'  I  fit  iii.  10  :  "  lui  that- will  love  life,  and  see  good  days. 

io  far  then  we  have  been  speaking  ofvnatttFal  life  only. 

I  |ave  been  thuH  |;aitieular  in  speakingj  of  it,  because  the 

natural  sense  is  of  <'Oursc  the  prin^toyy  and  furnishes  the 

/asis  of  the  spiritual  sense.     We, s^hail  find,  if  I  mistake 

iot>  by  carrying  these  definitions/ with  n.>^  thk  they  will 


~ass£t  u^  greatly  l^lMlipprehe^^  calk 

'^etematUfc,"'  Mhlch as  a  term  is/used  in  a  precisely  similar    v 
V  way,  a  way  whicli  the  crude  corii>tion  of  31es^rs.  Constable-/ 
'  and  Roberts  cart  in  no *wi^e  baronize,  much  less  explain. 
If  life  then  is  not  mere  "  existence,"  •  eternallife  "  is  still 
less,  if  possible,  merely  "eternal ; existence."     It  is   a  life 
begun  here  ami  now  in  tho»e  who  ^re  nevertheless  as  morta^^ 
as  eVev,  a  cvonsidcralion  which  at  once  sets  Buch  an  explana-'* 
'  tiou   of  it    entir(>ly  f^'^'^^-    7^^  -picked   Avho  have  it  not 
'♦  exist "  iust  as  much  as  those  who-have  it,  while  they  do  not 
m  this  sense  '  Ihe"  at  all.  ,'  Let  us  examine 'this  closely,  for 
it  is  the  key  of  the  v.-hole  position:  -        '  -      ,    , 

;  *'  Eternal  Lfe  '"  in  Script  ure  W  .-ilways,  as  before  said,  zoe,  . 
never  pau(-h<'.     1^  ^s  presented  ho^ycver  in   the  same  four   •, 
'  aspects  as  thi^natmral  llf.'.     Here  the  potcijtial  life*',  ihc  flteul 
•  of  ihis  spiril^al  existence,  is  Christ  Hims(,^lf     The  phenom-. 
enal  life,  tl\e  rrsuU  of  UV'.  relationship  to' us,- is  that  which-  ' 
begins  with  our  nc\^  :ui.l  spiritual  birth.'    The  historical  -l.ife  . 
is  oar  individual  course  on  o.irth  a-  «-hildrcn  of  God,     An^' 
finally  we  enter  »i])oii  life,  embai-k  on  it  in  the  fnJ!  and  preg- 
nant sense,  when  w.'  "g")  itilo"  it  \n  the  fast  haNtening  dav    • 
of  the  v*^aviour\s'  comhtj;.     W<^  m"st  ^^ok  at  it  in  each  of 
these  different  apl^H'-aliou'-. 

1.  Apart  from  the  ijlust ration,  not  eveik  Mr.   Constable 

would  pro1>abiy  .lopytVo  tirsl  ^ensc,  although  he'nm^t^  ucmkIs 

'  ■;  be  far  from  secn,^»  it    ■'  })t1i  of  :,'  --.  .1  •  nw'aning.     Scripture 


#' 


176        FACTS  AHI>  THKOniES  iJlS  to  A  i^UTUltK  STAtK.  ^ 

is  full  of  it ;  but  it  will  suffice  to  quote  but  a  few  passages, 
rhus  the  apostle  speaks  of  Him  who  in  the  beginnini,' was 
with  God,, knd  was  God,  that  "in  Him  was  life,  and  the  life 
was  the  light  of  men  "  (John  i.  4).  In  his  %t  epistle  simi- 
^  larly,tliafr>*the  life  was  manifested;  ami  ^4^' have  seen,  it,* 
jjnd  bear  wifm',s>s,  aiid  shoyv  un'to  yon  tliat  eternal  Ult^whicli 


m 

s 
Son 


.^. 


^■■\ 


\ 


^     was  with  the  Father,  and  was  manifested  unto  ^^  "^ff  Join 

A.f.:2).     So    the   record  is,  "W /God  hath   giveh   unto  u 

-'etenial  life,  anc]  this  life  is  hi  His  Son ;  he  |kt  hath  the  Soi 


hath  life,  and  he  that  hath  not  the  Sonoftiod  hath  not  life 

:^QW  here  to'begin  Mith^  let  me  ask,  is  it  eternal  ej^l^caee 
^  that  was  manifested  in  Christ,  and  was  the  light  of  men? 
But  again,"  and  furthermore,-^  "     r    '    • 

2/  ^pi  only  has  "  he  that  hath  the  Son  of  Goxl "  got  lilfo. 
but  he  has  got  it  as  a;  present  possession  and  an*a1)iding  one^ 
.He   has- no   mere  pletlgeand    promise   of    it.      It^is   as 
h  -possessing  it  that  JieJs  in  the  spiritual  sense  a  child  of  God 
and  born  of  God. 

_  .^ He  that  believeth  on  the  Sojti   Jmth   everlasting  life" 
;>(a!<)li:hiii.'86).     "Verily,  verily,  I  say  unto   you,  He  that 
he^retb  my  words,  and  believeith  on  H|m  that  sent  me  hath 
eviBrlasting  litt^  «n.l  shall  not  come  into  condemnation,  but 
IS  pass?jed  from  d,eath'uuto  life  "  (ch. "  v.  24) . 
,:'      Is  this  only  'f  the  pr^mile  and  the  pledge  "y     Nay ;  for— 
i '  ."  Excej)t7e'cat  the  fleshj^f  the  Son  of  man  an.l  <lrink  His 
Wood,  yelme  no  liie"l^.y<m ;  whoso  eateth  mv  flesh,  and 
:armketh  my  bkiod  llATtf   eternal   IHc "    (ch.   vl.   5.5,  .''>4). 
And   again,"We  know  "that  we  have  passed  from  Ileath 
mto  life,  Tiecause  we  love  the  brethren.     He  th^it  loveth  not/ 
,  •  hlfl  brother  abidelh  in  <Ieath.     Whosoever  Imteth  his  brother 
.48  a  murderer;  A»<iVe;know  that^  no  murderer  hath  eteruai 
fife  ABIDING  IX  II  ni  "  (1  John  iii.  1 1,  15).           \         .       .    ' 
.      Thus  etertid  life  M  « id,"  anrl  f^  abi^eth  in  "  the  'believer'":-- 
he. has  no  mer*  pledge  and  promise  of  it;  it  \^  begun  in  him 
/Already.     Listen,  and^iei*^ Lord  Himself  wiH  define  it  vet 
•  mortf  wiinolv  "  for— — ^^^^^^^^ ■   '  — -^^— — — ^ 


\ 


mortf  wiinply  J'  for 


i 


/' 


V_, 


A 


,'  «,      M       W 


KTKRNAL   LIFK:    WHAT    IS   IT? 


w 


iages. 

1 

■■ 

;  was 

e  life 

si  mi- 

en, it,* 

■    .:'  ■.  ■■  ■-. 

rhich 

.    .     1    ■' 

Jolin. 

'    i 

o  us 
;  Son 

.■ 

life" 

te/ice 

■    ■  ■ 

ren? 

.: 

■         '  : 

lilr^ 

one.  ■ 

'  "\ 

s  a^ 

_    .     ■,' 

God 

* 

■      ■;■ 

- 

\       ■■■':^ 

Ufe" 

'        ■          ■     f 

.     * 

that 

,. 

ATll 

but 

1 

jr — 

h 

His 

J 

and 

.: 

r>4). 

■  . 

- 

jath 

not' 
:her 

^r    ') 

- 

'uai 

1,    1 

i. 

or  :-*   • 

-       ; 

liin 

vot- 

■              1 

1/^ 

"This  is ///'^  ,'femal,  ihat  they  might  know,"  or  better, 
« that  they  know,"*—"  Thee  the  only  true  God,  and  Jesus 
Christ  whom  Thou  hast  sent  "  (John  xvii.  3).         /     ^ 

Here  it  is  characterized  for  us,  and  we  know  (if  we  know      • 
anything)  the  life  it  speaks  of.     It  began  in  us  when  faith 
begam     It  began  with  our  new  birtlu    It  is  not  then  eter- 
nafexisteiice,  for  still  wo  die.     It  is  not  existence,  but  a  new 
and  blessed  energy  of  good  ;  an  activity  of  holy  aflfections 
of  which  Christ  now  known  as  Saviour  is  the  spring  and  , 
soul.     This   is   eternal  life,  if  Scripture  is  to  be  believed. 
The  definitions  of  annihilationists  fail  hopelessly,  therefore,  ^ 
here.  ^Eternal  life  is  not  immortality  ;  it  is  not  eternal  ex- 
istence,  as   they  allege.     It  is   the ^  life  which  we  have  as 
spiritually  quickened 'from  the.  dead. 

;].  The  outward  liist;prical  life  necessarily  blends  with  the 
outward  natural  life'^d  that  they  cannot  be  really  separated. 
The  life  of  the  sahU  and  the  life  of  the  tnaii  are  here  but 
one.  For  this  reason  no  Scripture  can  be  product  under 
this  head,  which  might  iM>t  be  fairly  challenged.         \ 

4.  But  the  pregnant  sense  is,  as  we  might  expect,  in  fullest 
use  of  all ;  for  our  life  points  ever  forward  to  the  time  when  . 
we  shall  have  it  in  all  that  it  implies.     And  even  as  we  have 
said/ the  young  man 'enters  u^on  /(/«,"  when   he   enters 
Apon  its  full  activities,  free  from  the  necessary  restraints  of 
imnjaturitv,  ^o  we  too  shall  "  epter  Into  life,"  albeit  we  have 
it  now  within  us.     And  who  that  feels  the  workings  of  the 
life  within  most  fully,  but  must  look  forward,  too,  most 
Bimpty  to  that  future,*  and  say  to  himself,  w  ithout  a  thought 
of  denyhig  what  he  has  already,  that  his  life  is  there  ? 
^       Thus  "yd  have  your  fruit  unto  holiness,  and  the  end  ever- 
lasting lite  •'  (Uom.  vi.  22);  "  in  the  world  to  come  et^nal 
iitVPIark  x.  30) ;  "in  hope  of  eternal  life"  (Tit.  i.  2); 
^*  shall  inherit  cverlastiirg  life  "  (Matt.  xix.  29),  and  sunikr 
^pressions,.  in  no  wise  interfere  with  the  fact  asserted  qmte_ 
asi  pl,ainly,  if  not  as  fregubntly,  that  we  have  eternal  life  abid-^ 
•-"      *  For  it  i^a  woU  k»towri,^t>«cifliarity  of  John's  gospel  to  use  'iv(t  fot ' 


■■t, 


l\ 


1/  "    V 


„ 

« 

'i^     » 

J 

- 

p' 

1* 

• 

-— 

Ji 

178 


A'AClo  AND  lUJiOKlEb  At  TO  A  FUTUKE  HXATE. 


ing  m  U3  now.  These  are  only  the  various  modes  of  speech 
which  as  we  have  seen  we  use  with  regard  to  the  natural 
life  itself:  -  • 

Yet  these  expressions  are  all  that  the  writerK  who  hold 
what  they  call  the  doctrine  of  ♦•  conditional  immortality  "  can 
V  urge  againsfthe  view  that  life  eternal  is  what  is  begun  in 
us  in  new  birth  already.  '  Mr.  Constable  calls  this  sense  of 
life  the  "figurative"  sense.     But  it  is  no   more   figurative 
than  13  the  necessary  result  of  using  words  pertainipcr  to 
what  is  natural  and   applying  them  to  what  is  spiritual. 
^  And  this  we  have  always  to  do  if  we  speak  of  the  spiritual 
at  all.     Eternal  life  l)elongs  not  to  the  sphere  of  the  natural. 
It  is  what  was  manifested  In  Christ  down  here,  and  is-  ours 
now    in    present    possession— spiritual    not     natural    life. 
Hence  we  use  the  term  as  it  must  be  used;  and  Mr.  Con- 
stable cannot  use  it  in  his  fashion  without  falsifying  Scripture 
to  do  so.  a  " 

He  does  thus  falsify  ii,  when  he  says,  *•  Scripture -repre- 
sents eternal  life  as  a  gift  not  yet  enjoyed  by  the  ciiildren 
of  God.'"     He  falsifies  it  when  he  says  that,  "while  there 
are  no  doubt  many  Scriptures,  which  describe  the  believer 
as  now  having  everlasting  life,   we   are  expui-.ssly  told 
elseichere  that  this  consists  in  havlnrj  Go-'Ts  pledge  and  pro- 
mise oi  that  everlasting  life;  but  not  its  aetual  posse.ssion 
and  enjoyment."    This  is  botd  mis-statement.     Where  is  it 
"  expressly  told  "  y     m,..  Constable  cannot  find  it.     He  can 
find  that  we  are  promised  it  and  go  into  it.     He  can  find    " 
that  we  have  it-now.     He  cannot  find  that  the  latter  onlv 
means  the  former,       ^^ 

Hence,  his  premises  being  unsound,  his  conclusions  must 
m.  Eternal  life  is  not  eternal  existence  simply,  but  some 
thmgfar  beyond  it,  ani  the  wicked,  not  possessing  eternal 
life,  are  not  thereby  proved  to  lose  existence. 

There  is  only  one  clause  of  this  argument  remainin<r  to 
detam  us  for  a  moment.  The  words  of  the  apostle  (Col  iii 
3)  are  quoted  in  his  own  behalf  by  Mr.  Roberts:  "Your 
life  18  hid  x^nth  Christ- in  God."     And  .so  General  Goodwyn  - 


BTBRNAL  LIFE:    WHAT  IS  IT? 


17»' 


^  JBttemity  of  Umng  dates  from  the  reBurreotion  ( John  ri.  40, 
53,  54)  and  is  at  present  *  hid  vith  Christ  in  God.'  Never- 
theless the  child  of  God  '  hath  '  it  now,  howbeit  it  is  in  safe 
custody,"  etc.  This  is  the  way  in  which  these  men  read 
Scripture  !  Where  is  it  said  that  "  eternity  of  living  "  is  hid 
with  Christ  m  God  ?  It  is  said  "  your  life  is."  And  where 
is ihere  a  woid  about  its  being  in  "  in  safe  custody  "  ?  It 
iB  William  Cowper,  Tliolif've,  who  sings, 

*' Your  life  is  iml  with  Christ  in  God, 
,  ^    ^        Fipjf<md  the,  redck  of  hann.'" 


■  to 

^ 

i 

[iii. 

1 

our 

yu:- 

•■ 

- 

1 '' 

m.-- :  ■■■- 

) 

1 

But  tlien  that  is  not  Scripture,  The  Scripture  use  and 
purport  of  tii«j  text  which  Mr.  Goodwyri  quotes  is  far  other- 
wise. "  Yft\re  dead'''  says  the  apostle, ''  and  your  life  is  hid 
with  Chriht  in  God;  when-  Christ  our  life  shall  appear,  then 
shall  ye  .'ilso  appear  with  Him  in^ory.".  The  passage  be- 
longs to  the  first  class  of  texts  pc^jrod  out,  in  which  our  life 
is  ulentifed  with  its  origin.  Chm^is  this  life.  He  is  hid 
in  God,  and  the  world  sees  Him  not  until  the  day  of  His 
appearing.  Our  life-  then  is  in  character  a  hidden  one,  we 
shall  not  appear  till  we  appear  with  Him.  A  Kfe  which 
draws  its  character  from  Him  WM9  is  the  soul  of  it  cannot 
be  known  by  a  world  which  has  r^cted  the  Son  of  God  and 

•  foimd  no  glory  in  the  l^ord  of  glory.  With  Him  then  we 
are  dead.  Our  life  is  a  hidden  one,  for  Christ  is  hidden. 
But  it  is  hidden  i:ii  G^ 
which  it  will  shine  fully  out." 
loe  shall.  This  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  question  of 
security,  or  with  eternity  of  living.  It  irf  Christ  -v^ho  is  hid- 
den, and  whcii  is  our  life 
Him.     But  that  is  •  no  de 

.  implies  tfee  very  contrary, 
gives  us  this  character,  and  mjrfi 
world  knoweth  us  not;  becai 
iii.l).  ^     •  ; 

Eternal  life  is  not  then  mere  et 
'it  date  onlv  from  the  resurrection, 


rod,  ai»d  soU^  waits  for  the  time  in 
Itt  .^.,+      Christ^is  to  appear ;  and  then 


|ife,  therefore,  is  hid  with 

its  being  in  us  here,  but 

our  possession  of  it  that 

J>eing  the  soul  of  it,  "  the 

w  Him  not  "  CI  John 


ity  of  living,  nor  does 
It  dates   ^T  us  from; 


V  ■ 


»^ 


■*■'  ■ 


'fi. 


180        FACTS  AND  THEOBIES  AS  TO  A  FLiUKE  STATE. 

that  qaickening  by  the  Spirit  which  every  child  of  Go^  has 
known ;  and  manifests  itself,  though  the  world  (and  ala.s, 
others)  have  no  eyes  for  it,  in  every  throb  and  movement  of 
the  soul  God  ward;  while  w«  wait  yet  to  enjoy  its  ful- 
ness— ■  ■■■     ,  •        •■'.■■,■ 

"  In  the  world  to  come,  eternal  life." 


V 


./ 


CHAPTER  XVm. 


TttE    FIRST    SENTRVf'E. 


As  I  have  said,  I  do  not  refuse  to  consider  the  moral 
aspects  of  the  present  question.  But  just  now  we  are  occu- 
pied with  what  must  necessarily  j? recede  all  such  considera 
tionis."  The  facts  must  be  before  us  before  there  can  be 
any  proper  appreciation  of  th«ni.  We  arc  searching  for 
the  facts  of  the  case,  and*  any  preliminary  moral  reasonin"- 
would  be  out  of  place— %ould  hinder  and  not  help  our 
investigation.      ^  -   ^v.  " 

The  question  of  penalty  stirs  all  the  feeUhgs  of  our  heart, 
and  there  are  two  things,  often  forgotten,  \yhich  should  lead 
us  t6  question  how  far  we  can  safely  allow  their  influence. 
.  The  first  is,  that  we  are  judging  in  our  own  oause.  The 
second,  that  the  sin  which  has  entailed  the  penalty  lias  en 
feebled  necessarily  the  power  of  true  judgment.  The  heart 
of  man  is  not  only  "  desperately  wicked  "  :  it,  is  deceitful 
too.  Will  it  be  apy  more  likely  to  judge  righteous  judg- 
ment because  the  cause  it  pronounces  upon  is  if s  own  ? 
itself?  Is  the  simier's  estimate  of  sin  and  its  desert  so  "^ikely 
to  1)6  right  ?  B  there  no  sel  f-interest  in  the  way  ?  no  pride 
that  wiuld  forbid  to  stoop  so  low  as  to  the  truth  ?  Ah 
the  heprt  of  man!  that  question  of  th(!  All-seeing  is  th 


nt  of  its  trust  worthiHess:     '•  V\  ho  can  know  ity" 


ju<3g- 


■    i 


I^K  PI' 


Yet  there  is  One  who  kno: 


181 

im?  and  has 


spoKen  in  sucb  a  way  tha|^^^^^^^Hpdly  know  what 
He  has  said  ?  He  has.  I  e^Sj^^^H^t  stir  my  poor 
human  feelings,  no  doubt,  and  makHHSnrmur  at  the  judg-^ 
raent  He  has  given  -.—A  am  quite  capable  of  that.  But  I 
look  at  the  Cross,  where  fox  man  His  own  Son  hung,  and  I 
cannot  persuade  myself  I  have  a  more  tender  heart  than  He. 
No :  His  judgment  is  not  an  enemy's,  nor  the  impassive 
estimate  of  One  mdiSferent.^/le^as given  //is  Son.  And 
though  His  judgments  may  be  a  great  deep,  and  I  may  be 
little  able  to  follow  out  His'  governmental  ways,  I  have  what 
\h  hetter^  for  I  know  Hi tnself.  ■* 

Thus  you  and  I,  reader,  are  to  listen  to  His  words;  not 
with  heartft  callous  to  human  suffering,  but  subject  to  Him. 
The  deep,  dark  shadow  of  the  Cross,  whereon  for  us  the 
Son  of  God  hung  and  died,  prepares  us  for  a  view  of  sin  and 
its  results  deep  and  dark  enough  in  shadow.  Biit  we  know 
the  heart  wc  ?ling  to  through  the  gloom ;  and  the  pheep,  here 
as  ever,  know  the  Shepherd's  voice. 

We  are  now  to,  look  at  the  solemn  question  of  penaltjf.. 
Mr.  Constable  does  but  follow  in  the  track  of  others,  wj^en 
he  takeij  us  back  to  the  sentence  upon  Adam  to  find  in  it 
the  key  to  the  whole  matter.  We  shall  examine  what  he 
says  attentively. 

"Death,'  he  lemurks.  " was  the  penalty  which  God  originally 
pronounced  against  human  sin.  All  that  God  purposed  to  inflict 
upon  Adam  and  his  posterity  in  case  of  transgression  is  included 
in  that  word  '  death.'  'In  the  day*  that  thou  eatesfc,  thou  shalt' 
die. '  It  is  of  the  utmost  consequence  then  that  we  should  under- 
stand what  God' meant  by  death;  nor"  is  there  the  smalle.st 
difficulty  in  doing  so  if  we  will  only  attend  to  what  reason  and 
justice  require,  and  what  Scripture  expressly  declares.  Its  mean- 
ing then  we  contend  to  be,  when  it  is  thus  attached  to  sin  as  its 

*Edw.  White  maintains  (Life  in  Ctirist,  p.  118)  that  the  execution 
of  this  was  not  carried  out,  but  the  sentence  was  delayed  by  mercy. 
This  is  a  mistake.     "  In' the  day  "  does  not  require  so  rigid  a  constnu- 
tiun. — Coiiii>.  '2  Sam.  xxii.  1,  Van.  xcv.  8,  IjIgcI.  xii.  3,  Is.i.  xiv.  t^,  xxx. 


26,  Jer.  vii.  22,  Kzek.  xx.  r»,  ai)d  esppcially  K/.ek.  xxxiii.  12. 


-ho  might  answer  us  that 

ig  he  objected  to,  and  set- 

solated  -'nexts."' 

j^h  an  aiHW  seems  to  .be  hi 


lie  himseli  beireves  in  the 
I,  and  walk  in  them,"  and 
jeepy  shibboleths  and  dead 
Moreover  he  believes  at 
Therefore,  it  should  seem 
%roof  texts,  and  see  how 
le,  they  justify  his  position, 
who  vouches  for  his  very 
B  Holy  Ghost,  who  tells  us 
we  would  not  have  that  in 
i  phrase  wrenched  from  its 
I  as  we  please,  we  must 
.  We  shall  find  the  words 
church  at  Corinth  (iii.  6) ; 
uns  thus:— =■ 


ourselves  to  think  anything 
y  is  of  God,  who  also  hath 
%/)  Testament  /  not  of  the 


«'-.- 


,/ 


'    f H 


-C- 


// 


w-^m:.  ■ 


■,1  -.  ■ 


-.r 


:.        * 


J3 


Aateelalion  for  Ififoniurtioii  and 

*)?J-^        IIOOWayneAvenue.  Suite  1100 
.**\,   -■     Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

•       ■  301/587-8202 


ManaoaiiMiit 


^^■■ 


'■■a^ 


«:*■ 


Centimeter 

2        3        4         5        6         7        8        9        10       11       12       13       14       15   mm 


m 


\\f\f\M\\\\\\if\\^^^^ 


Inches 


2  3 

1.0      m 


lift  |£    12.2 


136 


i 


Hi 


I.I 


11.25  i  1.4 


2.0 


I 


18 


1.6 


,9k 


^: 


^> 


m/^ 


^ 


y 


MONUffRCTURED  TO  RUM  STRNDflRDS 
BY  APPLIED  IMRGE.  INC. 


t<^^ 


».      "•** 


^'- 


182 


PACTS  AND  THE0BIE8  AS  TO  A  PDTtTRE  STATE. 


I 


'mk 


i 


.  penalty,  the  loss  of  life  or  existence.  '  One  of  the  first  p^ciples  of 
justice  requires  that  parties  threatene'd  with  a  penalty  for  trans- 
gression should  have  the  fuUg,^t  opportunity  of  understanding 
what  the  penalty  is.    God  accordingly  speaks  to  Adam  of  death 
-,  as  a  thing  whose  nature  Adam  £new.     Now  Adam  knew  very  well 
y=what  death  was  in  one  seftse,  and  in  an^  sense- onbj.    He  knew  it 
to  be  the  law  of  the  l^w^r  creatures,  and  ^  consist  in  the  loss  of 
their  beinet  O'ld  existence.     Hfe  knew  nothing  of  any  other  senses 
of  death,  such  as  •  death  in  sin  '  or  « death  to  sin,'  for  in  his  inno- 
cence he  did  not  know  what  sin  was  at  all.     Still  less  did  he 
understand  by  death  an  eternal  existence  in  agony.     Ho  had  one 
clear,  weU  understood  sense  for  death,  the  loss  of  life  and  lieing." 
Again  he  says  :-#.,. 

"As  soon  as  Adam  transgressed  God  came  to  him,  and  repeat- 
ed to  him  in  other  wordi*  the  penalty  he  had  just  incurred.  It 
was  '  dust  thou  art,  and  iinto  dust  thou  shalt  return. '  God's  defini- 
tion of  the  death  inflicted  for  the  first  transgression  is  frequently 
repeatSd  in  the  later  Scriptures.  Paiil  tells  us  that  it  is  the  death 
which  aU  men  actually  undergo,  whether  they  are  among  the 
saved  or  the  lost  i  and  therefore  an  eterpal  existence  in  pain  can 
be  no  part  of  its  meaning  (Rom.  v.  12,  U,  17  ;  1  Cor  xv  2'>i 
Such  too  was  the  death  which  Christ  endured  for  human  sin- 
the  very  same  penalty  to  its  fuU  extent  to  which  man  was  ex-, 
posed  ;  and  therefore  spiritual  death  or  an  eternal  Ufe  in  misery 

can  form  no  part  whatsoever  of  its  meaning X>od  said 

nothing  in  the  first  instance  of  transgression  as  to  whether  this 
death  would  be  temporal  or  eternal,  but  what  the  death  was  He ' 
fully  explamed  both  by  word  and  by  example.     He  gave  life  to 
the  race  of  man,  and  He  would  withdraw  that  life  if  man  smned. " 
I  have  thus  quoted  Mr.  Constable  in  full  in  order  taring 
the  subject  properly  before  us.     If  it  had  opiy  been  for  the 
sake  of  answering  him  much  less  would  have  sufficed.     But 
we  are  seeking  to  bring  out  the  Scripture  doctrine  and  not 
merely  to  refute  certain  errors;   and  this  is  an  imp6rtant 
point  to  be  clear  upon  in  order  to  a  full  and  satisfactory  ' 
view  of  the  great  subject  before  us     Yet  in  aiming  to  be 
thus  clear  we  must  enter  into  a  field  of  many  controversies 
not  yet  by  any  means  extinct,  and  are  almbst  sure  to  awaken' 
feelings,  which  may  prejudice  the  point  of  main  <(.n<,ern  for 


'iJr 


•31 


w 


THli    FIKST    SE^TEKOE. 


1»3 


J 


many  minds.  Still  we  must  not  shrink  from  what  seems 
needful,  and  Scripture  is  no  more  iincertain  here  than  else- 
where. 

;  As  to  Mr.  Constable's  main  point,  it  is  not  hard  to  see 
that  he  makes  immense  aasumptions,  and  that  upon  these  his 
argument  in  its  entirety  rests.  Let  us  grant  for  the  mean- 
while, at  any  rate,, that  it  is  of  ordinary  daath  the  prohibi- 
tion speaks.  How  can  he  prove  what  Adam  knew  abou|^'^ 
it?  Supppse  it  true  he  must  have  known  what  the  penalty^ 
was,  how  can  he  show  that  Adam  learned  it  from  seeing 
death  around  V  how  can  he  show  that  there 'had  been  any 
death  to  see  in  Eden  t  If  death  had  been  there,  how  can 
he  harmonize'  this  with  the  "  creature  being  made  subject 
to  vanity,"  as  Rom.  viii.  19-23  shows,  through  man's  sin, 
and  waiting  man's  deliverance  as  its  own  ? 

Supposing  it  true  that  Eden  before  the  fall  had  been  pro- 
faned by  death  and  corruption,  how  does  he  know  that 
Adam  would  have  argued  thjtt  death  would  be  to  him  as 
absolute  nonentity?  Everywhere  througji  the  world  we 
find  that  man  has  nursed  an  instinct  of\Jii|ontrary  sort  in 
the  lace  of  suclf  death  ever  before  his  eyesl  Why  should 
he  think  that  he  who  had  had  wisdom  given  him  to  name  all 
the  beasts  and  distinguish -them  from  himself  should  have 
been  less  wise  ?^  Or  haply  does  he  think  this  a  mark  of 
degradation  ?  or  what  else  V  . 

Again,  if  man  were  to  have  instruction  about  death,  why 
should  not  God  instruct  him?  If  we  must  needs  assume, 
what  other  assumption  has  more  probability? 

In  the  face  of  all  this,  Mr.  Constable's  argument  for  ex- 
tinction loses  all  probability.  When  contrasted  with  the 
reality  of  what  death  is,  according  to  the  Scriptures  we 
have  examine/d,  it  is  manifestly  entirely  inadmissible. 

But  it  will  be  profitable  to  inquire  more  fully  just  what 
was  the  punishment  of  death  denounced  on  Adam,  and  how 
far  it  has-affected,  his  posterity.  And  the  simplest  method 
we  can  take  in  doing  so  seems  to  be,  without  any  doubtful 
argument  as  to  the  words  of  the  prohibition,  to  ask  our- 


f 


.•'mir 


-w 


•mm 


t' 


1K4 


lAC  IS  ANr»  tllKOKIIlS  AS  T(»  A    FCniri:  STATE.    * 


selves,  whnf  Scripture  elsewhere  stat«'s  as  to  tlie  .-onseqiien- 
ees  of  the  first  sill. 

Now  evidently  the  fulle,vt   stateinent  we   h^Ve  as  to  its 

effect  on  Adam's  postOFity  46j.ihit  whicUs-  given  us  by  the 

apostle  Paul  in  the  fiftji  chapter  of  his  epistle  to  tl.e  saints 

;at  Rome  (vers.  ll>-21).     And  here  there  are  thr  e  things 

of  which  he  speaks  :— 

First,  "  sbi  entered  into  the  world,"  and"  '•  mr.ny  became 
sinners  ";  this  is  the  depravation  of  nature,  which  is  the  sad 
heirloom  of  suceeediiig  generations. 

Secondly,  «  death  li(f  sin,  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  "  : 
this,is  corporeal  death,  the  death  he  could  point  to  as  unde- 
niably "reigning  from  Adam  to  Moses"  even,  the  time 
before  the  law.        ,  .  : 

Thirdly,  ''judgment  was   by  one   to- condemnation,"— 

''Mponalimen  to  condemhation."    Thiy||i'hat  deaths  fol- 

lowing  upon  fiin,  proclaimed. '^  It  was -^mP^  that  nature 

•was  tainted  in  her  whole   course,that  "thd  God  who  had 

made  man,  and  could  not  otherwise  repent,  now  "  turned  him 

to  destruction."  • 

Of  these  thre6  things  the  #8t  clearly  is  the  cause  of  the 
judgment  pronounced,  and  not  the  judgment  itself  Of  the 
two  latter,  the  first  is  the  infliction,  and.  the  second  is  in- 
•i volved  in  it,  and  shows  its  character.  Death  is  the  infliction, 
b^t  not  as  qfi  arbitrary  thing  procee"ding  from  the  mere  will 
of  the  Creator,  but  the  mark  of  changed  relationship  to  Him 
which  the  fall  ha\i  i)roduced."  D^th  then  (what  we  ordi- 
narily call  that)  was  the  sentence,  and  that  alone ;  but  it 
involved  necessarily  a  cliange  in  moral  relationship  ]>etween 
the  Creator  and  the  creature,  distance  between  man  and 
God,  which  His  iQve  and  pity  might  yet  find  meanl  of  bridg- 
ing over,— which  was  not  jeijincd  therefore,  but  which  was 
thei'e. 

Now,  I  apprehend,  the  difficulty  found  in  reading  aright 
the  sentence,  "Thou  shalt  surely  die,"  proceeds  from  the 
seeking  a /;m/ sentence  in  what  was  not  inton-lod  yet  a-, 
final.     God  had  of  course  His  plan  of  mercv  ah<  .i 


\ 


t 


-4. 

1  ■ 

'-'i- 

i 
■J 


1. 


Hi 


t'  ■ 
TE.  * 
onsecjiien- 

as  to  its 
us  by  the 
ti.e  saints 
'%  tilings 

y  became 
;8  tile  saci 

ion  all " : 

as  tfnde- 

tlie    time 

ation,"- —   ** 
eatli^^  fol- 
it  nature 
^\io  Iiad 
rned  iiim 

se  of  the 
Oftlie 
id  is  in- 
nfliction, 
lere  will 
►  to  Him 
we  ordi- 
;  but  it 
between 
nan  and 
)f  bridg- 
hich  M'as 

g  aright 
rom  the 
I  yet  a:; 
.'  \\\  Mis 


THE   FIKST  8ENTENQE. 


185 


}|- 


-4 

I 

■■■<! 
•t 
■.f 


mind,  and  was  not  yet  giving^  eternal  sentence.  Had  He 
left  man  to  himself  indeed,  no  self-recoVery  on  n\an's  part 
being  possible,  it  would  have  been,  no  doubt,  practically 
eternal.  But  He  had  no  design  of  leaving  him  to  himself. 
As  we  know,  this  senfence,  under  which  the  whole  race  lies, 
is  not  the  close,  but  the  beginning  of  our  history;  and  we 
shall  keep,  I  believe,*  most  closely  within  the  limits  of  revela- 
tion, by  interpreting  the  sentence  following  the  sin  of  Adam 
as  in  no  way  involving  the  eternal  issues,  biit  as  strictly 
provisional  with  a  view  to  the  intended  mercy.  This  relieves 
at  once  from  the  difficulty  as  to  the  penalty  involved;  It 
makes  all  clear  and  consistent ;  and  is  in  the  highest 
degree  important  in  reading  aright  the  eternal  penalty  itself. 
This  in  no'  \py  interferes  with  the  tirst  death  being  the 

'type  and  shadoin  of  the  second,  while  it  harmonizes  with  the 
fact  that  when  the  second  death  comes  the  first  death  will 
entirely  pass  away.  It  harmonizes  also  with  the  statement 
of  Scripture  everywitete,  that  that  second  death  will  be  con- 
sequent upon  dk  future  judgment,  in  which  men  will  be 
judged,  not  at  all  for  Adam's  sin,  but  "according  to  their 
works."  It  harmonizes  also  with  what  we  shall  find  to  be 
the  fact  hereafteif,  that  the  Old  Testament  revelation  has  no 
direct  announcement  of  the  second  death  at  all.  In  a  word, 
it  will  be  .found  to  clear  the  way  for  the  after-question 
in  many  and  most  important  respects,  while  it  i^  a  view  of 
the  matter,  which  from  Scripture  itself  it  seems  impossible 
to  contravene.  ,  .^ 

It  must  be  admitted,  .however,  to  lie  athwart  two  of  Mr. 
Constable's  assumptions  very  directly.  The  first  of  these 
is,  that  "  ALL  that  God  purposed  to  inflict  upon  Adam  and 
posterity  in  case  of  transgression  is  included  in  that  word 
'  death '  "  in  the  original  sentence .  The  original  sentence 
may  be  a  shadoio  of  the  final  one,  as  I  have  said,  tmt  that  is 
all,  and  not  enough  for  his  argument.  His  statement  itself 
is  a  mere  assumption,  which  it  is  Hufficient  therefore  to 

^'deny.  ■  '  j  /■  ■  •_;     ■    '■'  •      ■.  *-  ■", 

The  second  is,  "  that  parties  threatened  with  a  penalty  for 


'•«. 


:*^ 


"*-* 


% 


fj 


1«6 


F.Vtns^M>  THEoiuKS  AS  To  A  i'lrtLICK  STATK. 


*'A 


trangression  should  have  the  fullest  opportunity  of  under- 
:  stancTing  what  the  penalty  is."  Xow  the  i^enalty  here  is  for 
latiiifj  of  (he  tree.  Did  that  define  to  Adam's  posterity,  who 
never  sinned  this  way  at  all,  nor  could  do  so,  what  the  pen- 
alty of //*'//•  sin  \vould  be  V  Plainly,  as  to  legal  enactment, 
"from  Adam  to  Moses '' there  was  none.  And  thus  not 
one  of  thorn  could  be  punished;  (rertainly  not  raised  up 
to  endure  the  agonV  of  the  lake  of,  firo,  of  which  no  expe- 
•riencCj  no  instinct,  no  revelation,  could  give  them  the  merest 
huit  ! 

But    Mr.    C6nstable's   assumption    will    not   endure   the 
moral  test,  any  inore\ than  it  will  the  test  of  Scripture.     Is, 
sin  a  thing  iu  itself  Worthy  of  punishment,  or  only  when 
committed  in  full  viev!^-  of  its  consequences':'     We  must  of 
course  grant  that   that  full  view  involves  heavier  responsi- 
bility.    But  do  I  only  sin  when  I  know  exactly  what  I  shall 
lose  by  it  'i     That  is  an  ^nmioral  argument,  which  infers  so. 
X-or  is  it  consistent  with  what  even  nature  itself  teaches. 
For  he  who  sins  against  the  laws  of  natu#  so-called  (which 
are  after  all  divine  laws),  ti'^  a  generalcthing  knows  little  of 
^  the  consequences  of  wliat  he  does ;  y<!t  disease  and  death 
follow  none  the  less  surely. 

Thus  easily  are  Mr.   Otinstable's  theories  refuted.     And 
while  we  do  not  force  into,  the  first  seHtence  anything  that 
the  words  will  not  without  irain  admit,  while  w<'  do  not,  we 
trust,  add    one   iota   to    theV"  whole   libraries  of  confused 
jargon  and  Hopeless  nonsen^i^e,''  which  he  tells  us  have  been 
written  upon  this  subject,— Iwhile  we  deny  as  much  us  he 
,that  the  death  spoken  of  is  death  in  sin,  of  death  to  sin,  or 
even   eternal  tf>rme^t,— we  Maintain   none   the    less,   that 
while  certainly  deatfeis  death!  it  is  not  extinction. 
.    It  would  be  the  most  attrat;l^ive  courses,  peihaps,  from  this 
point  to  follow  out  the  Old  'liestament  revelation  as  to  the 
future  state ;  but  before  we  call  do  this,  we  must  look  still 
fiirther  at  the  lexicography  of  i  the  subject  that  we  may  un- 
derstand the  meaning  of  the  terms  which  are   used  with 
reference  to  it.  bofore  we  look  int  it  as  a  whole. 


'> 


TE. 


iJKaTKH  TION,  A.ND  L'iti  K,iMJ>j£^D  IKKMS, 


IHT 


of  under- 
here  is  for 
mtv,  who 
t  the  pen- 
nactment, 

thus  not 
raised  up 

no  expe- 
he  merest 

idure   the 
ature.     Is, 
mlv  when 
!  must  of 
responsi- 
lat  I  Khali 
infers  so. 
f  teaches. 
m1  (which 
1  little  of 
nd  death 

ed.  And 
lino-  that 
o  not,  we 
confused 
live  been 
eh  us  he 
to  sin,  or 
ess,   that 

Tom  this 
as  to  the 
look  still 
mav  un- 

* 

led  with 


'> 


\<r 


\ 


CHAPTER  XIX. 


■■*•# 


OK.STUUCfJfoN,  AM>   ITS  KIXDRED  TEKMS. 

MEJSTT. 


— THE    OLD    TKSTA- 


We  shall  Still  mainly  follow  Mr.  Constable,  because  he  is 
the  one  appealed  to  by  his  colleagues  as  the  principal  au- 
thority on  tlie  subject,  and  bejcause  he  certainly  claims  to 
give  very  distinctly  the  whole  vockbulary  of  words  relating 
to  it.  Indeed,  I  may  say  the  main  part  of  his  argument  de- 
pends upon  this.  But  his  strength  a,ud  his  weakness  lie  very 
near  together,  as  we  may  shortly  see. 

He  gives  us  fiist  the  Old  Testament  phrases,  and  foremost 
of  these  the  passages  wliich  speak  of  death,  as  Psa.  vii.  13; 
Prov.  yfi.  3G;  xi.  1;  Ezek!  iii.  IS;  xviii.  4-  xxxiii.  8.  I  do 
not  as^ yet  take  up  their  application:  this  will  come  after- 
ward^; we  are  only  at  the  vocabulary  now.  He  adds  to 
thesre  two  (Ezek.  iii.  18;  xiii.  22)  which  give  loss  of  life  as 
th/ equivalent  of  death.  No  one  would  deny  this,  of  course; 
the  question  is,  is  death  extinction  ?  We  have  seen  over 
^nd  over  again  that  it  is  not,  and  Mr.  Constable  admits  that 
if  this  were  proved  it  would  "  militate  giavely  "  agamst  its 
being  so  when  applied  to  future  punishment.  These  are  his 
words  (Hades,  eh.  vii.  17)  : —  \  : 

"And  hove  we  would  particularly  warn  the  upholders  of  tiixxl  t 
•scriptural  trath  of  life  and  immortality  only  in  eiiri.=it,  to  beWare  I 
how  by  explaining  away  the  natural  force  of  the  many  Scriptures  L 
vyhich  teach  that  the  soul  Jfes  in  the  fir.st  death,  they  greatly  *• 
weaken  their  own  argument  when  tlicy  come  to  insist  that  the 
.second  death  means  the  tnie  and  real  extinction  of  the  entire 
^man.     Scripture  speaks  of  it  simply  as  death.     If  the  first  death 
is  consistent  with  man's  in  fact  not  dying,  but  continuing  to  live 
in  regard  to  his  most  import#t  part,  whose  survival  again  may 
be  .supposed  to  imply  the  restoratiort-of  the  body  to  life,  it  seem^, 
plain  that  the  common  idea  of  the  'first  death  MiiiiTATEa  obavely 
against  our  view  of  what  is  intended  by  the  second." 


■\  s- 


<', 


188  FACTS  ANU  THKOUir.S  AS  TO  A    FlTirKK  STATI; 


Rlt 


This  witness  i»  tnu',  and   it  is  all   1  tuicd  say  hrrr.     The 
meanin;^  of  thu  j)as8agt'S  we  Hhall  examine  by  and  by. 

He  next  crowds  together  a  number  of  passages  of' verv 
different  applioations  which  lie  makes  to  describe  the  ''end 
of  the   ungodly": — "  THe  destruction  of  the  transgressors 
and  sinners  shall  be  together"  (Isa.  i.  L'S) — which  applies 
to  the  purification  of  Zion  in  the  last  days;  '']»repare  them 
for  the* day  of  slaiujlitcr''  (Jer.  xii,  ii) — which  is  also  judg- 
ment in  the  land;  "the  slain  of \the  Lord  shall  be  many," 
and  "  they  shall  go  forth  and  look  upon  the  m/r</.srN  of^thc 
men  that  have  sinned"  (Is:i.  Lwi.  16,  24) — God's  destruc- 
tion  of  Israel's  enemies  and   others;  "Ood   shall   dti^/roi/ 
them"  (Psa.  xxviii.  fi);  '•  they  shall  be  consumed"  (xxxvii. 
20);  '•  they  sliall  be  rut  o/"' (xxxvii.  3S)  ;  "they  shall  be 
rooted  out  of  the  land  of  the  living  "  (Psa.  lii.  .')) — misquoted, 
and  referring  to '■  Doeg,  the  Edomite  "  ;  'blotted  out ''of 
the  book  of  life  "  (Psa.  Ixix.  28)  ;  and  "  they  are  not "  (X<ib 
xxvii.  19)  : — not  one  of  these  can  be  shown  to  apply  to  the 
final  judguKuit  of  tiie  wicked.     Let  Mr.    Conlfe>le  prove 
this  if  he  can. 

But  "  for  the  h'ake  of  greater  ])lainneM  '^he  takes  up  the 
separate  Hebrew  words;  and  here  the  fiiU  amount  of  his 
concession  as  to  death  becomes  ajiparent.  Aft  thear  mn-t/s 
are  applied  to xlcaih.  If  death  therefore  does  not  mean  ex- 
tinction, plainly  its  synonyms  need  not.  Thus,  then,  the 
foundation  being  remove<l,  Mr.  Constable's  edifice  falls  to 
the  ground. 

Thus  we  have  first,  attad  (laX)  to  perish :  and  here 
presents  itself  from  Lsa.  Ivii.,  a  text  already  spoken  of  "  The 
rhjhtii>m  perisheth,"  auU  yet  "enters  into  peace";  "the  ' 
good  man  is  perished  out  of  the  earth."  It  is  the  word  also 
applied  to  a  "lost"  sheep  (Psa.  cxix.  170;  Jer.  1.  0;  Kzek. 
xxxiv.  4,  16). 

But  we  can  little  trust  Mr.  Constable's  statements:  the 
next  word,  haras  (Din),  he  says,  is  "  another  word  in 
frequent  use  for  future  punishment."  There  is  one  pasm<ji 
which  he  mny  jtossibly  hsiv ethom/ht  applied,  but  wliich  has 


•f- 


The 


n:. 

H  of   VtTV 

the  'ViMjc'i 
istjressor.s 
li  applies 
»are  them 
Iso  judfj^- 
•('  raaiiy." 
cN  of"* the 

destnic- 
[    ih'Htroj/ 

(xxxvii. 

shall  be 
isquo^ed, 
I  out  of 
3t"  (X<ih 
ly  to  the 
le  prove 

8  up  the 
nt  of  his 

mean  ex- 
hen,  the 
;  falls  to 

ml   here 
f.    "The 
";    "the  ' 
ord  also 
5;  Kzek. 

nts:  the 
vord    in 

[uch  has 


J>I.STi:irTlON',  .\.NI>    ITS    KIMiltKD   TKKIIS. 


189 


no  necessary  refcreiu'e   to  another  state  at  i»ii,  i 

r.      • -^ 


and* that  is 
l*sa.  xxviii.  r» :  "  IJeeaiise  they  regard  not  the  works  of  the 
Lord,  neither  tin;  optmition  of  His  hands,  He  shall  destroy 
[or  overthrow]  them,  and  not  build  them  up." 

The  third  wor<l  l:camath  (HDY),  is  the  word  usejd,  in  Psa. 
oxix.  IJiO,  "  my  zeal  hath  consumed  me  " ;  and  in  l^xxviii. 
IG,  "thy  tern)rs  have  (tut  me  off."  It  would  be  impossible 
to  show  it  to  refer  to  final  judgment  at  all. 

The  fourth,  {thamad  (^0*J•),  Mr.  Constable  says, "  is  sig- 
niticant  oi'  uffer  extinction,'^  ho  that  it  must  be  the  most 
Ibrcible  of  all  these  terms.  Yet,  we'  find  it  used  to  predict 
the  curse  upon  Israel  under  the  penalty  of  which  as  a  nation 
they  still  are,  and  which  is  not  "  utter  extinction,"  as  the 
very  passage  shows.  **  Also  every  sickness  and  every 
plague,  which  is  not  written  hi  the  book  of  this  law,  them 
will  the  Lord  bring  upon  thee,  till  thou  be^- DESTROYUD. 
And  ye  shall  be  left  /5v«  in  nnmber,^^  etc.,  i.^^^not  utterly 
extinct  at  all  (I)eut.  xxviii.  01,  02).  In  the  3aji' chapter  it 
is  ad<led  further,  *•  And  it  shall  come  to  pass  when  all  these 
t lungs  arc  come  upon  thee,  the  blessing  AND  the  curse, 
which  I  have  set  before  thee,  and  thou  shall  call  thm  to 
mind  .  .  .  and  shalt  return  unto  the  Lord  thy  God  ...  that 
then  the  Lord  thy.  God  will  tur^  thy  captivity,"  etc.  (ch.  xxx. 
1-3).  Here  is  national  repentance  and  restoration  predicted, 
after  what  ^Mr.  Constable  calls  "  utter  extinction."  Here  is 
in  fact  the  j»laee  in  all  Scripture  where  the  word  is  used 
most  constantly.  It  is  foun<l  in  xxviii.  20,  24,  45,  48,  51,  61, 
translated  'destroy'  and  in  08  "bring  to  nought":  and 
yet  the  very  prophecy  shoNvs  that  there  is  no  "  utter  extinc- 
tion "  at  all  in  the  matter. 
^  It  is  also  used  repeatedly  of  "  death,"  which  is  not  that. 

The  fifth  word  is  karath  (n^D)  in  Niphal,  which  Job 
(xiv.  7)  uses  to  say,  in  the  face  of  Mr.  Constable,  that "  there 
is  hope  of  a  tree,  if  it  be  cut  down-'  i.  e.,  of  course,  "  hope  of 
a  tree  after  it  is  extinct,"  as  we  saw  of  Israel  before. 

It  is  used  also  (Dan.  ix.  20)  of  Messiah  being  cut  off:  and 
let  Mr.  (^)iistable  say  what  this  means. — ~~ — ' — — 


£^, 


ItfU 


KACIS  AMi^'UKOUIKa  AM  To    V  FOXUKli  HrAlK. 


It  i8,U8od  of  death  continually,  and  this  Ih  indeed  fiifl 
almost  constant  une,  although  •  it  does  not  always,  as  we 
see,  mean  as  much  as  that ;  for  a  ih.ad  tree,  never  sp,ont.'<.  • 

Finally,  the  sixth  word,  ttat/uttz  ()'n:),  is  used  once  in  the 
psalm  wEit,'h  according  to  its  title,  speaks  of  Do(  ^'  (lii,  5;  : 
•  God  sliall  likewise  (/rstro;/  thee  forever:  he' shall  Take  tbee 
•may,  and  pluck  thee  out  of  thy  dwelling-place  {lit.  tent), 
•md  root  thee  out  of  the  land  of  ihe  living.'  It  is  death  by 
the  judgment  of  God  that  is  indicated,  and  the  nieaning  is 
better  given  in  the  margin,  "  beat  thee  down.' 

I  have  grave  complaint  to  Inake  of  the  way  Mr.  Consta 
ble  uses  all  these  words.    He  is  content   to  say  loosely  of 
them  that  they  are  "applied  to  future  punishment."     He 
brings  forward  no  proofs,  he   suj^poses  you  will  take  his 
word  for  it  of  course.'    He  never  attempts  to  show  that  they 
apply  to  the  judgment  a/Yer  death  at  all.     Temi)oral  judg- 
ments are  mixed  up  with  eternal.     No  exceptional  uses  of 
t!ie  words  are  taken  notice  of  at  all,  no  contrary  arguments 
.that  might  be  alleged,  or  anything  of  the  kind.     Tlu-  conse- 
Tjuence  is  that,  while  claiming  i)reci.se  accuracy,  he  is  as  loose 
and  inaccurate  as  well  may  be. 

Lqt  Mr.  Constable  point  out,  tew  or  manv,  the  passages 
be  relies  upon  to  prove  his  point.  :  Lot  lum'b.ing  forward 
the  convincing  arguments  which  a.ssure  him  that  it  is  indeed 
•*  eternal  judgment,"  that  they  speak  of  Let  him  meet  the 
arguments  upon  the  other  side.  Let  him  show  that  the 
words  which  speak  of  the  destruction  of  material  things 
apply  in  the  same  sen.se  to />;nnaterial  things.  Let  him  t^ 
this,  and  hewiljat  least  have  brought  his  argument  into 
some  tangible  shape,  and  one  which  the  gravity  ol  tbe  sub- 
ject demands.  Until  he  does  so  we  shall  have  ,ause  to 
suspect  an  argument  which  requires  the  assumption  of  mate- 
riabsm  for  its  support,  and  which  treats  the  overthrow  of  a 
ma7i  and  of  a  loaU,  as  if  it  was  undeniable  there  was  no 
diflference  between  the  two.  * 

We  shall  give  Mr.  Constable's  summing  up  of  the  Old    • 
Testament  testimon j\  as  he  understands  it.     We  have  gi voa 


>- 


X 


iiii;. 

lys,  as  w« 

iu;e  iu  the 
;^Mlii.  5;: 
take  tbee 
[lit.  tent), 
death  hy 
ean'mg  is 

•.  Consta 
r^osely  of 
nt."     He 

take  his 
tliat  they 
ral  judg- 

uses  of 
'ijfuinents 
1)0  eonse- 
i  as  loose 

passages 

forward 

is  indeed 

meet  the 

tliat  the 

il  things 

him  t^o 

cnt  into 

tlie  8ub- 

•ause  to 

of  niate- 

ow  of  a 

was  no 


■'Jt:- 

■ii 


J)E8TKUCT10N,  AND    IT8   KIXUUED    TKKMS.  Itl 

hii  whole  reasoning,  and  therefore  may  safely  appeal  to  our 
r6aders  if  he  has  taken  the  first  step  towards  showing  what 
he  asserts. 

•'  By  every  unumbiguoas  tenn,"  he  says,  "it  has  pointed  out 

the  punishment  of  the  wicked  as  consisting,  not  in  life,  but  in  th« 

loss  of  life  ;   not  in  their  continuance  iu  that  orgahiz«jd  form 

whicli  constitutes  man,  bnt  in  its  dissolution  ;  its  resolution  into 

its  oripfin.il  parts,  its  becoming  as  though  it  had  never  been  called 

into  (existence.     Wliile  the  redeemed  are  to  know  a  life  which 

knows  no  end,  the  lost  are  to  be  reduced  to  a  death  which  knows 

_J-        of  no  awaking  forever  and  ever.     Such  is  the  testimony  of  God 

^  iu  the  Old  Teshiyient.     If  Christian  divines  refuse  to  accept  it 

_:  I M'cause  Pliito,  .mrt  before  h'im  Egyptian  priests,  taught  a  doctrine 

j  «t  the  soul's  essential  immortality,  let  them  see  to  it.     Wo  prefer 

the  word  of  Oiod  to  the  logic  of  Plato  and  of  Egypt."      ' 

And  so  do  we.     Nor  have  we  appealed  to  either,  or  to 

^  aught  but  the  word  of  God  all  through.     And  moreover 

we  have /faithfully  and  minutely  examined  Mr.  Constable's 

arguments  througjW^  ^nd  tested  them  by  that  word,  and 

have  found  them  ^Kfrig.     The  keystone  of  his  whole  argu^ 

>__::3uient,  as  we  have  said,  is  its  materialism,  and -he  has  himself 

4        virtually  admitted  it.     If  <3eath  is  not  extinction,  as  it  is 

rwt,— if  the  soul  is  immortal  (thotigh  not  independently,  but 

by  the  will  of  its  Creator),  as  it  i8,--then  Mr.  Constkble's 

argument  is  wholly,  iiretrievably,  hopelessly  gone  forever. 

But  we  must  follow  him  into  the  New  Testament. 


>. 


■4. 


ll 


«' 


the  Old 


192        If AiJJH  SUD  XllliOUlLo  A?)  10  A  1:1  ILMi:  stATE. 


CHAPTKR  XK. 


ill 


I  I 


THE   XKW   TKSTAMKN'T   TKUMS. 

Hu  begins  of  course  with  the  wor.l  so  decisive,  one  way 
or  other,  to  his  cause — with  "  death." 

He  quotcis  a  number  of  the  passages  in  wiiicli  this  is  ap- 
plied to  the  punishment  of  the  wicked,*  "  with|^t  the  small- 
est effort  to  show  that  its  terms  Sleath '  or  Mo  die'  have 
any  new  sense  placed  on  them."  ^  .       ,  * 

Now  if  this  be  so,  and  we  bear  with  us  the  reme4Hfl)rance 
of  what  death  (in  the  ordinary  sense  of  it)  is,  and  tlj.it,  it 
never  means  nor  implies  the  extinction  of  being,  we  shall 
have  to  consider  all  the  texts  he  Oan  bring-  for\var<l  of  ^his 
kind  as  «//am«^  and  not  ./o/-,  his  view  of  the  evtiiictioii  of 
the  wicked.  No  more  than  the  seed  in  extinct,  when,  sown 
in  the  ground,  it  is  preparing  the  ha^t--ho  more  than 
man  is  extinct  when  the  spirit  re^ns  tfpfiod  who  gave, 
'    it— no  more,  if  I  am  to  accept  the  necessaijjrbouclusion  from 

such  use  of  words,  ijainore  will  the  wickecf  become  extinct  J 

when  eternal  death  becomer^  their  awful  ]>ortion.     I  grant,  x 

of  course,  the  body  might  become  extinct  upon  this  view  of 
the  matter,  but //o^  the  spirit  or  the  M^ul.     Even  Ko,tl)cr^<  is  » 

no  escape  from  God  into  the  blank  of  ncrtientily.     Alas  for 
him  wV>  thinks  that  there  is  such  !  r 

But  we  cannot  avail  ourselves  of  this  argument ;  for  this 
reason,  that  there  /.•>•   an   ex/m-ss  stafiuu/tf,  that   death  as    . 
.      applied  to  the  final  punishment  of  the  wicked  is  not  mere  J 

ordinary  death.     In  llevw  xx.  14,  the  "second  death"  is  ex-  | 

plained  to  be  "  the  lake  of  fire."     The  editors  of  the^rqek  1^ 

^Testament,  without  exception,  re^d  the  passage:  "This  is  | 

*  the  Becond  death,  <Ae  ;«Ae  t»//yr."     Ami  to  this  the  first 

♦  John  vi.  50;^^  51  ;  xi.  26  ;  R<mii.  vi.  2\-^i ;  viii.  1:5 ;  2  Cor.  1i. 


16;  James  i.  ^5;  v.  20;  Re^.  xx.  14, 


\ 


'mi 


TK. 


TIIK   J^KW   TKSTAMJiXT  TEltMS. 


lua 


»,  one  way 

this  is  ap- 
llic  stnall- 
<lic '  have 

rnW!)rance 
n<l  tlwit,  \l 
;,  wo  shall 
irtl  of  this 
tiiictioii  of 
rh'.'u,  sown 
more  than 

who  i;ave. 
lusionfi'om 
»me  extinct 
1.  I  «;:rant, 
liis  vi(!W  of 

Ko,tl)cr^|'"is 
.     Alas  for 

it ;  for  this 
It  <leath  as 
s  not  mere 
ath  "  is  ex- 
•  the  Greek 
' :  "  This  is 
lis  the  first 

l:};  2Cor.  li. 


death  (ielivers  up  its  prisoners.  This  is  at  the  end  of  aH. 
when  the  heavens  and  earth  flee  away  before  the  facp  ot  Him 
who  sits  upon  tbe  throne  of  judirment  (^'r.  11).  It  is  when 
finally,  all  enemies  boing  i)ut  uiuler  His  feet,  the  Son  shall 
deliver  up  fhe  kingdom  to  the  Father;  and  then  "death, 
the  last  ehcmy,  shall  bjj  destroyed."*  15ut  so  for  fro^the 
tiecond  death  being  then  destroyed,  it  is  then  that  its  reign 
begins,  to  endure  (whatever  that  may  mean)  "  for  the  ages 
,   of  ages."  ,  .       '       , 

The  first  death,  then,  gives  plaee  to  the  second.  They 
are  not  the  same.  The  "  second  deat^i "  is  the  lake  of  fire. 
Will  even  Mr.  Constable  assert  that  this  is  oi^I^  extinction? 
Second  extinction  it  cannot  be,  fbr  therd  has  been  none 
before,  and  moreover  extinction  would  be  deliverance  ./•^><*'i;; 
it.  Ex!linction  Ay  it  would' be  as  rapid,  according  to  t^ 
iisual  argtlments,  as  by  any  x)ther  process  whatever.  How 
long  would  it  take  for  life  to  be  extinct,  or  flesh  and  blood 
to  be  consumed  by  a  literal  fire  of  brimstone  ?  Woui4'it';{ 
consist  with  "  torment  for  the  ages  of  ages  "  ?  Yet 
must  at  least  be  the  distinctive  fmtnre  of  the  lake~-e^nre. 
What  then  does  this  "  second  death  "  imply  ?  It  m^t  be 
torment  and  extinction  ?  But  these  are  contlSctoW 
terms.  "  Life  or  <kHth;'  says  a  writer,  "  is  the  theme  dfthe 
Bible,  not  life  or  tannentr  Yet  here  tormerit,  and  that  "for 
ages  of  ages,  must  be  ^admitted  io  Ipe  the  distinquiahimf 
feature  of  the  second  death  !  Thus  death  tnust  in  this  case 
■  mean  torrhent ;  at  le^t^hat  must  be  j^dft  of  what  it  means; 
for  the  lak«  of  fire  undeniably  means  torment.  It  cannot 
mean  irresistible  power  of  extinction,  for  any  ordinary  ^ 
would  make  quicker  work;  flesh  kid  bipod  ev^n  can  res^ 
it  for  ages,  and  so  (as  all  natural  comparison  is  oqt  of  qiies- 
(ion)  why  not  forever  ?  No ;  it  means  protractedSprment,' 
extraordina?!-,  imnaturally,  supernaturally  protradJbd  tor< 
ment;    if  it  can  mean  this  and   extinction  ^too,    then  ex- 

*  For  thus  it  seems  one  should  read  "hdxccroJ  h^fjot  Harotoyf^r 


«» 


■■\\l:'      ( 


Mmit  mim' 


-^"r 


194         FACTS  AND  TUEOUIES  AS  TO  A  PL' TURK  KTATE. 

* 

tinction  itself  may  mean  protracted  existence  and  its  end 

alike. 

Tims  at  least  "  death "  here,  as  applied  to  (he  future 
punishment  of  the  wicked,  is  not,  cannot  he,  and' is  c'xi)resHly 
stated  not  tp  be,  used  in  its  ordinary  sense.  I  shall  not 
pursue  the  matter  further  here  because  the  fitting  place  to 
in«iuire  its  precis*  meaning  will  be  found  when  we  come  to 
look  at  the  intensely  solemn  and  important  i)assa<,'c8  reU'rre<l 
to.  This  we  liope  to  do  in  the  fullest  way  hereafter,  and  do 
not  wish  to  anticipate  it  here. 

Mr.  Constable  goes  on  to  the  passages  which  speak  of 
"  eternal  life  "  as  the  portion  of  the  righteous  alone.  This 
we  fully  believe,  and  have  looked  at  already.  lUs  (luotation 
of  Matt.  X.  29  has  also  been  met,  and. needs  only  to  be  re- 
ferred to  briefly  again.  It  runs :  "  he  that  findeth  his  life 
shalllose  it,  but  he  that  loseth  his  life  for  my  sake  shall  fiuil 
it."  Psuche  is  the  word  used  here  in  both  cases,  and,  as  I 
have  before  said,  the  par.allel  place  in  Luke  ix.  25  show.s 
that  "  his^soul  "  is  just  the  equivalent  of  "  himself^  And 
this  we  have  seen  to  be  very  common  phraseology  in  Scrip- 
ture. The  finding  and  losing  (the  same  word  as  elsewhere 
given  "  destroying ")  the  soul  in  the  present  world  arc  re- 
versed in  the  world  to  come.  The  finding  becomes  losing, 
thtf  losing  finding  there.  He  who  makes  himself  the  object 
of  his  life,  loses'himself  and  is  cast  away.  lie  who  sacrifices 
self  and  its  interests  for  Christ*s  sake  is  really  preserving 
all  for  the  -world  to  come.  The  idiomatic  expression  is  im- 
possible perhaps  to  put  into  English  without  a  periphrasis; 
but  the  meaning  is  intelligible  enough,  An<l  the  actual 
laying  down  of  life  in  martyrdom  is  not  neqC?ssary  at  all  to 
the  application.  Can  none  but  those  whd_^  actually  die  a 
martyr's  death  live  eternally  V  The  making  it  a  question  of 
literal  death  or  life  would  affirm  so.  It  is  not  "  life"  then, 
that  properly  translates  or  interprets  the  verse. 

Mr.  Constable  now  turns  aside  for  a  moment  to  Moses* 
wish  to  1)6  "blotted  out  <»f  (tod's  book"  (Exod.  xxxii.  82). 
lie  lliinks  that  "  wo  caimot  suppose  that  he  could  even  for 


I 


ud  its  end 

(he  future 
3  ox|)resHly 
[  shall  not 
g  place  to 
e  come  to 
L'S  rei'crre<l 
tor,  and  do 

[  speak  of 
one.  This 
s  (juotation 
^  to  be  re- 
Kth  his  life 
B  shall  fiiul 
i,  and,  as  I 
,  lio  show.s 
^//:"  And 
;y  in  Scrip- 
i  elsewhere 
rid  are  re- 
tnes  losing, 
thd  object 
o  sacrifices 
preserving 
«sion  is  iin- 
eriphrasis; 
the  actual 
•y  at  all  to 
iially  die  a 
piestion  of 
life"  then, 

to  Moses* 
xxxii.  li'I). 
d  even  for 


I 


THE   NKW  TESTAMEN'T  TEltMS. 
nit  have  wished  throughout  elomity  for 


195 


vi 


a  nionu^i 

pain  and  moral  corruption,"  and  so  we  must  infer  he  wanted 
"  the  utter  cessation  of  life  "  instead.     But  it  is  a  little  too 
much  todecidoa<iu('stion  of  this  nioinent  by  our  supposition 
one  way  or  another  of  what  Moses  i/n/sf  have  wished  for  at 
a  moment  ()f  intense  and  excited  feeling.     Granted  he  did 
not   wish    for    "  nioral   corruption  "  at   all,  much   less   for 
oteniity,  he  might  have^cepted  the  thought  of  punishment 
instead  of  the  pe(^|  WTTOout  a  question  of  this.     To  force 
his  words  into  fei-f^t  and  calm  consistency — to  reason  out 
the  feelings  of  a  mbinent  when  intense  emotion  had  over- 
mastere<l  reason— isAo  pervert  and  not  to  interpret. 
Wc  have  heard  Mr..  ,Mhiton's  complaint  of  the  use  of 
'  figurative   ScHptures,  by    which   certainly  God   means   us 
nevertheless  to  learn  something  on  the  subject,  whai,ever  it 
may  be.     Yet  iiere  Mr.  Constable  would  take  Moses'  wish 
at  a  moment  of  unreasoning  excitement,  follow  it  but  to  ill 
its^  necessary  consequences,  and  decide  the  question  in  his 
own  favor  by  a  simple  suggestion  that  he  could  not  have 
meant  to  acceiJt  these  consequences!     To  which  we  need 
only  answer,  suppose  he  could  not,  what  then  ?     Is  it  so 
strange  a  thing  in  times  of  much  less  intensity  of  feeling  fbr 
conse<|uences  the  most  obvious  to  be  wholly  forgotten  and 
ignored  ? 

,       We  pass  on  to  consider  other  terms  used  for  eternal  pun- 
ishment. 

The  first  of  these  is  apoleia  (^jrcJA^a)^^  "  destruction." 
Mr.  Constable  says,  "  There  is  not  in  the  Greek  language  a 
word  more  strongly  significant  of  the  utter  loss  of  existence. 
'Its  proper  meaning,'  says  Schleusner  in  his  lexicon,  'is 
the  destruction  of  anything  so  that  it  ceases  to  exist."' 
He  then  (|uote8  Peter's  words  to  Simon  Magus,  '*  Thy  money 
perish  with  thee,"  literally,  "thy  money  go  with  thyself  to 
destruction,"  and  adds,  "Here  we  see  Peter's  sense  ^•.de- 
struction. It  had  the  same  meaning  when  applied  to  a  man 
as  it  had  when  applied  to  metal :  disorganization  and  wast- 
ing away  until  it  should  disappear,  was  the  idea  which  Peter 


n 

li   I 


i    1 


!! 


I 


190        FACTS  AXD  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE. STATE. 

attached    to    it  in   both  cases   alike."     His  next  argument 
is   still   more   extraordinary.     Quotinj;    Attn   xxv.    16,    htv 
remarks :  .  » 

'*  I'V.stiis  hen'  t«'lls  Aj;riirt»<t  that  it  waS  not  tlic  mann<  r  of  lln> 
llonmns  to  «li'livtr  nuy  muu  to  (It^ulh  (literuUy,  to'de.structioii) 
before  the  aecnscd  had  un  oppoi-tiinity  of  dofouding  him.self. 
Festus  here  calls  tlie  destruction  of  man  hi.s  death  ; " — Mr.  Con- 
stable means,  of  conrsu,  tliat  he  calls  a  man's  f/^*////  Ids  destruc- 
tion,— "and  as  Festus,  uorBTLES.s,  Avith  almost  every  man  of  his 
station  at  that  time,  riiUcul^'d  the  rfrt/  iilfu  </  uni/futni-f  Uf,'  after 
this,  lie  could  only  have  iiit<'nded  by  tlu;  destruction  of  a  man 
the  putting  him  out  of  all  existi-ncc.  Likij  i^y  isixo  accepts  the 
TEKM  IN  THE  SENSE  OF  FE-stls,  aud  We  huve  thus  in  the  usage  of 
two  of  the  inspired  writers  of  the  New  Testament,  Peter  and 
Luke,  the  sense  of  destruction  established  as  i)utting  out  of  ex- 
istence." 

If  this  argument  were  in  the  first  edition  of  Mr.  Consta- 
ble's book,  it  is  rather  extraordinary  that  the  book  has  sur- 
vived to  a  fourth.  Such  reasoning  would  seem  only  possi- 
ble to  such  mental  hallucination  as  would  preclude  all  serious 
controversy.  Out  of  the  simple  fapt  that  Luke  chronicles 
Festus' words  in  which  be  uses  for  "death"  the  word^ 
"  destruction,"  Mr.  Constable  draws  the  amazing  conclu- 
sions : — 

First,  that   because   Festus   was   a  Roman  governor,  h^\ 
'  doubtless"  shared  the  scepticism  of  his  day. 

Secondly,  that  in  using  the  word  "destruction"  in  this 
case,  Festus'  (su])pos»<l)  views  gave  the  word  a  peculiar  sig- 
nificance. 

Thirdly,  that  Luke  must  have  known  the  scepticism  that 
was  in  Festus'  mind.     And —  , 

Fourthly,  that  by  recording  his  words  Luke  meant  to 
signify  his  adhesion  to  this  scei)ticism  which  Mas  behind 
them. 

^  I  can  only  say,  that  this  is  logical  insanity,  and  that  upon 
these  principles  all  reasoning  becomes  .impossible.  This 
very  Luke  elsewhere,  as' we  have  seen,  in  stating  the  well- 
known  Pharisaic  views  as-  to  "  angel  and  spirit,"  tells  us  thai 


E. 


IHB  a&W  TESTAMJiNT  TEUMS. 


197 


irgunient 

1 

.    16,    luv 

-    1 

«•!•  of     tllC 

structioii) 

't 

J  himsplf. 

■' 

-Mr.  Con- 

s  (Icstruc- 

uin  of  his 

'  li/i'  nfter 

of  !i  luiin 

t. 

t;EI'TS  THE 

'  usage  of 

Peter  and 

>ut  of  ex- 

.  Consta- 

c  has  sur- 

ily  possi- 

■  '± 

ill  serious 

hronick's 

he   wonV 

J  couclu- 

.  :'  '..f 

ernor,  he\ 

"  in  this 
!uliar  sig- 

sism  that 

^  ■ 

meant  to 
IS  behind 

hat  upon 
►le.     This 
the  well- 
Is  us  thai 


they  "  confess  "  both.  "  Confess  '*  is  his  own  word  and 
surely. implies  that  he  behevt'd  that  to  be  the  truth  which 
they  were  confessing.  Yet  Mr.  Uojjerts  <M)nsider/»  that  even 
too  worthless  an  argument  to  reply  to.  What  would  he 
say  to  Mr.  Constable's  ?  And  here  is  Luke  against  Luke ! 
Rather  here„  is  Mr.  Constable's  censure  of  the  unhappy  race 
of  historians,  who  it  seems  are  condemned  to  endorse  every 
falsehood  that  they  tell  us  another  utters ! 

On  the  other  h^nd  it  is  not  to  be  wondered  at  if  from  our 
point  of  view  we' should  consider  this  application  of  ''de- 
struction "to  death,  as  the  overthrow  of  the  very  thing  it  is 
sought  to  establish  by  it.  Not  alone  do  we  tind  it  in  the 
lips  ot  Festus.  The  verb  upollnmi  (diiuXXv/nt)  is  used  in  this 
way  over  and  over  again  (Matt.  ii.  13;  viii.  25 ;  xii.  14; 
xxi.  41;  xxii.  7;  xxvi.  52;  xxvii.  20;  Mark  iii.  6;  ix.  22- 
xi.  18;  Luke  xi.  51;  xiii.  33;  xv.  17;  xvii.  27,  29;  xix.  47; 
John  X.  10;  xviii.  14;  1  Cor.  x.  9),  and  translated  by  the 
words  "  destroy "  and  "  perish."  In  all  these  cases  utter 
extinction  is  not  its  meaning. 

In  his  interpretation  of  the  apostle's  words  to  Simon 
^  Magus,  Mr.  Constable  again  manifests  his  incompetence  as 
a  reasoner.  How  "  thy  money  be  to  destruction  with  thee  " 
shows  that  the  destruction  of  the  piece  of  metal  must  be 
just  of  the  same  sort  as  the  destruction  of  the  man,- it  would 
be  hard  for  him  to  show,  while  it  is  very  easy  to  assert  it. 
If  the  man  were  only  a  piece  of  metal  li^e  the  money  the 
reasoning  might  hold  good,  and  something  like  this  is  really 
the  ;%sis  of  his  argument.  He  is  a  consistent  materialist 
all  thfough,  and  a  material  destruction  for  man  is  all  he 
can  according  to  his  principles  believe  in. 

But  even  as  to  material  things  the  fdrce  of  the  word  is 
not  by  any  mej^ns)  what  Mr.  Constable  would  make  out. 
When  the  new  Vine  bursts  the  skins  and  the  bottles  are 
maprecl  (Mark  ii.  32)  the  same  word  is  used  to  express  this. 
Now  the  burstmg  of  a  skii|i-bottle  is  by  no  means  its  "  dis- 
organization anfl  wasting  away  till  it  should  disappear,"  as 
he  tidies  to  make  out  must  be  as  to  the  coin.     It  is  not  even 


flil.-^JH- 


198        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUBE  STATE. 

theJhHt  stvp  to  such  wastiwf  away.  This  would  equally  go 
on  were  the  bottles  whole.  Mr.  lloberts  urges  that  the 
bottles  are  .lestroyed  as  bottles;  but  that  is  my  argument, 
not  his  The  bottles  arc  destroyed />r  t/m purpose  totrhn-h 
thu  wi-re  onuimilly  ihstined,  and  so  is  man  whethei*  as  th(^ 
Bui.ject  of  the  first  death  or  of  the  fjecond.  In  either  case 
he  is  set  aside  from  the  place  for  which  he  was  originally 
created,  in  the  first  death  temporarily,  in  the  second "  ej<jr, 
nally.  But  the  bottles  exist,  though  "  destroyed  "  :  they  drf 
not  cease  to  be;  and  so  neither  does  man.  This  is  the 
Biblical  force  of  destruction. 

But  again,  apoUumi  is  used  in  the  sense  of  "  losing'  (Luke 
x\'.  4,  etc.).  The  "  lost "  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  (Matt. 
XV.  24),  the  "lost"  sheep,  "lost"  piece  of  m«)ney,  "lost" 
son  of  Luke  xv.  are  all  examples  of  this  use  of  the  word. 
Alsd  Matt./x.  6;  xviii.  11;  Luke  xix.  ID;  2  Cor.  iv.  3. 
Mr.  Roberts  here  contends,  that  "  in  the  case  of  an  article 
lost,  POSSESSION  is  destroyed  for  the  time  being."  These 
gentlemen  are  sometimes  wonderfully  easily  satisfied.  So 
a  man  in  prison  for  a  week  may  be  said  to  be  destroyed,- 
because,  as  R.  remarks,  "  soil kthinq  is  destroyed,"  and  it 
\»  no  matter  whether  it  be  the  man  himself  or  anything 
else,— his  liberty,  for  instance ! !  But  ui)on  this  gn.und  it 
would  be  hard  to  maintain  the  doctrine  he  so  zealously  ad- 
vocates.      -    ' 

Mr.  Constable,  Finds  up  his  discussion  of  these  two  words 
with  a  characteristic  challenge,  an«l  a  ro-affirmation  of  the 
words  of  Dr.  Weymouth,  whom  he  calls  "  one  of  the  best 
Greek  scholars  of  the  day,"  and  who  says,  "My  mind  fails 
to  ^conceive  a  grosser  misinterpretation  of  language  than 
when  the  five  or  six  strongest  words  which  the  Greek  tongue 
possesses,  signifying  'destroy'  or  'destruction,'  are  e.x- 
plahied  to  mean  maintaining  an  everlasting  but  wretched 
existence.     To  translate  black  as  white  is  nothing  to  this." 

But  it  is  Dr.  Weymouth  who  in  this  misinterprets,  and 
It  does  not  take  first-rate  scholarship  to  see  it.  For  where 
does  he  find  ^ny  one  who  interprets  the  words  in  question 


\ 


lally  go 
hut  tho 
juiuent, 
Uj  irhich 
f  as  tho 
ler  caso 
•iginally 

they  drf 
)  is  the 

'♦  (Luke 
il  (Matt, 
"lost" 
le  word. 
p,  iv.  3. 
II  article 
These 
letl.  So 
stroyed," 
"and  it 
.11  y  thing 
'(Mind  it 
•usly  ad- 

0  words 

1  of  the 
the  best 
ind  fails 
.jje  than 
^  tongue 
arc  ex- 
/^  retched 

this." 
'cts,  and 
r  where 
(]nestion 


THE  NEW  TESTAMENT  TEKMS. 


1 


199 


\ 


i'jf. 


by  any  tiling  else  than  "  destroy  "  and  "  destruction  "  ?  I  never 
saw  or  heard  of  one  who  violated  language  in  the  Avav  he' 
complains  of.  The  words  are  found  just  as  he  would  have 
them  in  the  common  version  of  the  liible  which  is  in  all  our 
liands, — a  version  made  too  by  people  of  tho  very  views 
which  he  assails.  Let  him  tell  us  who  the  people  are  who 
propose  to  change  them. 

The  fact  is,  this  is  not  what  Dr.  Weymouth  moans,  and 
tlie  parade  of  Greek  scholarship  is  thrown  away.  Dr.  Wcy- 
nioutii  niust  mean  that  we  take  the  Eagllah  wordsj^-which, 
thank  Go<l,  brings  the  question  into  a  shape  intelligible  to 
very  many  more  than  can  claim  to  be  scholars, — that  we 
take  t\\ii  EiK/'ish  words " destroy "  and  "destruction"  (for 
it  must  be  allowed  we  leave  them  in  our  Bibles)  as  mean- 
ing "  maintaining  an  everlasting  but  wretched  existence." 

Kven  in  this  he  is  exceedingly  inaccurate.  I  can  answer 
at  least  for  myself,  I  never  understood  these  words  in  any 
such  sense.  When  just  noW  we  were  speaking  of  the 
bottles  being  '=  destroyed,"  surely  no  one  understood  that 
their  " destruction"  meant  their  " maintaining  existence "  at 
all.  They  inhjht  exist :  true;  but  their  destruction  was  not 
their  existence,  nor  ever  understood  to  be  so.  It  was  their 
being  set  aside  as  useless  for  the  purpose  of  theiv  existence  • 
an.l  in  a  similffr  way,  only  remembering  the  unspeakable 
diilerenco  between  an  inanimate  thing,  and  a  raor&Uy  ac- 
countable being  such  as  man,  do  we  understand  the  destruc 
tion  of  the  wicked. 

Mr.  Constable  adds :  "  Even  the  leading  modern  advocate 
of  the  Augustlnian  view,  who  all  but  closed  his  literary  • 
labors  in  the  defence  of  thjs  wretched  cause,  looking  in  blank 
<lismay  at  tliese  words  of  7Toom,"cMiTmlysay^f  them, '  They 
do  not  hnjnrlabhf  mean  annihilation!'  We  on  the  contracy 
assert  that  such  is  in  the  New  Testament,  as  used  of  the 
wicked,  their  invariable  sense :  they  are  there  ever  connected 
with  death.".  ^ 

And  that  proves  procisely^he  opposite,  while  it  proves 
also  bow  Mr.  C:!onstable's  annihilatlonism  and  his  materialism 

-.  ■     ./■■  .  ■  :,.■  I-' ■■ 


?j;1 


!ii_.j ;_■:,■ 


?s? 


K    ! 


u 


■rr 


if' 


r;^ 


\ 


.s 


200        FACTJ?  and  THKORIE.S  AH  TO  A  FUTUKK  M-VTE. 

Stand  or  fall  tbgether.  I  make  no  pretension  to  more  than 
ordinary  Bcholarship,  but  I  dare  maintain  against  all  or  any, 
that  the  words  in  (juestion  xkvrr  in  tfieni^rhjcH  mean  annihi- 
lation at  all.  I-.ot  the  proof  be  only  from  Scripture,  and 
let  any  that  \vill  i)rove  it.     We  must  pass  on  tiqw  to  other 

Words. 

The  next  he  takes  up  is  aplf-wiizo  {dtpavKo)).  It  is  once 
used  as  applied  to  unbelievers  (Acts  xiii.  41),  ''  Behold,  ye 
despisers  !  and  wonder,  and  perish"  an<l  once  to  the  "van- 
ishing away"  of  life  (James  iv.  14).  The  latter  is  its  true 
signification  in  both  places,  although  it  has  other  meanings. 
Mr.  Constable  quotes  from  Josephus  two  passages,  in  which 
the  WiWd  is  used,  once  for  the  annihilation  of  the  sluggish 
and  cowardly  at  death:  ""a  subterranean  night  (li.s,w/o<s 
them  to  uothitKj'''' ;  and  once  in  describing  the  doctrines  of 
the  S;adducees,  "  that  souls  jyerhih  with  their  bodies'';  and 
he  adds:  '*  That  which  the  Sadduceos  taught  would  happen 
to  all  men  at  the  first  death  the  apostle  tells  us  will  be  to 
unbelievers  the  sad  result  of  the  second  death :  they  will 
rise  from  their  graves  and  see  what  they  have  rejected,  will 
marvel  at  their  folly  and  will  vanish  out  of  existence." 

But  almost  all  this  latter  is  pure  invention  :  there  is  noth- 
ing in  the  text  about  the  second  death,  about  rising  from  the 
graves,  or  even  of  passing  out  of  existence  in  his  sense  of  it. 
And  this  is  quite  unquestionable,  because  it  is  a  'simple  adop- 
tion of  the  language  of  the  Septuagint  translation  of  Hab.  i. 
5,  where  Mr.  Constable's  idea  of  it  suits  neither  text  nor 
context.  It  is  there  added  as  an  appendage  to  "wonder 
marvellously  "*  as  if  to  complete  the  sense,  *'  wonder  mar- 
vellously and  vanish.'  The  apostle  puts  it,  "  wonder  and 
vanish,"  thus  still  more  plainly  making  the  last  words  give 
emphasis  to  the  former  by  the  substitution  for  "marvel- 
lously"  of  "  vanish." 

We   have  next   four  words,  ultimately    united    together, 

*  The  LXX.  read75f  rf  oi  HixraipfiovTfrai  [nai  ini^iA-t'ipare,]  utxi 
Savjuadare  [Bavjuadia]  nai  dtpnyiisOtfrf.  The  apostle  leaves  out 
wjjat  i«j  enclosed  between  brackets. 


■  % 
s 


.f4- 


THE   NEW  TK8TAMENT  TKIIMS. 


201 


ore  than 
I  or  any, 
n  annihi- 
lire,  and 
to  other 

18  once 
'hold,  ye 
he  "  van- 
its  true 
idanings. 
in  wliich 
nhigufislj 

rines  of 
s'';  and 
happen 
ill  he  to 
;hey  will 
ted,  will 

^•"     -  ■ 
is  noth- 

from  the 

ise  of  it. 

•le  adop- 

PHab.  i. 

text  nor 

'  wonder 

ler  raar- 

idor  and 

rds  give 

'  mar  vol - 

ogetlu'r, 

trf,]  Htxi 
leaves  out 


■  * 


.m- 


phtheiro,  phthota,   diaphtfieiro   an  if  kataphthelro  {.f/Jn),G, 
ifOo/Jii,  'h,i,pfjeifjco,  »arit,pOf.i,jfv).     In   the   New  'rcstaiiH'nt 
the  first  and  second  :ire  uniformly  translated  "  ««.rrupt  "  and 
"corruption,"  evci-pt  I  Cor.  iii.  17,  wher^;  wi-  find,  correctly 
enough,  "defile"  and  "destroy,"  and  2  Pctur  ii.  12,  'nSide 
to  be  taken  and  dmtmyedr    The  thinl  is  foun<l  sjx  times : 
Luke  xii.  23,  "  where   no  moth  cormpteth'' ;  1  Tim.  vi.  ,0 
"men  oi corrupt  minds";  2  Cor.  iv.  1(1,  "  though  our  out- 
ward m&nperUh  ";  Rev.  viii.  9,  «  the  sliips  wereTA.s//-oye<?  "; 
and  xi.  18,  «  shouidst  destroy  them  which  dcsfn>i}  the  earth." 
The  fourth  is  only  found,  2  Tim.   iii..  8,  "men  of  corrniit 
mmdR,"and  2  Peter  ii.  12.  "shall  nt.fa-ly pvrhh  in  their  own 
corr,uption." 

The  meanings  are  sufiiciently  well  given  in  these  passages. 
Of  the  third  of  these  words  Mr.  Constable  says,  "  The  sense 
•  of  the  word  as  signifying  wasting  away  to  utter  destruction, 
IS  constantly  found  in  the  New  Testament."  Nowthe  word 
is  found  altogether  six  times  in  five  passages,  as  we  have 
seen,  an.l  Mr.  Constable  is  able  to  bring  forward  two  not 
very  clear  or  certain  instanees  of  this  "  constant "  use  :  the 
first,  "  no  moth  cormpteth  "  ;  the  second,  "  though  our  out- 
ward man  jocW.sA."     .  %■ 

Kut  it  is  upon  L^  l>eter  ii.  12  that,  he  naturally  lays  most 
emphasisj  "Si)eaking  of  the  ungodly,  Peter  says,  'These, 
as  natural  brute  beasts,  made  to  be  taken  dntl destroyed,  shall 
utterly  perish  in  their  own  corruption.'  Here  'the  same 
Greek  word  is  used  of  the  end  of  beasts,  and  the  end  of  the 
unyodly.  Wii  know  what  is  the  end  of  beasts  taken  and 
destroyed  :  even  such,  Peter  declares,  will  be  the  end  of  the 
ungodly  in  the  future  lifo:  they  shall  perish  there  as  beasts 
perish  here.''       ' 

This  argunu-ut  has  more  appearance  of  truth  in  it  than 
any  we  have  yet  had  from  .Mr.  Constable.  It  is  however 
merely  fallacious.  The  true  comparison  necessitates  no  such 
inference.  For  the  point  is  really  just  ^Vhat  we  have  before 
glanced  at,  man's  loss  of  the  place  for  which  he  was  origin- 
ally created  and  for  which  his  natural  constitution    fitted 


A 


#' 


20*J        PA<!T8  AND  TMKOUIKS  AS  TO  A  PrTUIlE  STATR. 


■)  i 


him.  From  thin  place  ho  pcriHhos,  utterly  iktIhIics,  :iiul  ig 
«lcHtroye<l :  he  "  Ioscm  himself  ami  is  cast  away."  This  is  the 
liatiiral  thing  for  a."  brute  beast,  tiutde  to  l)o  taken  ami  de- 
stroyed,"— to  fill  a  place  ^temporarily,  not  perpetually. 
Man,  made  for  eternal  occupation  of  the  ]»osition  assigned  to 
him,  perishes  like  the  beas^;  when  he  forfeits  forever  and 
loses  this.  The  comparison  with  the  beast  is  here  sufficiently 
obvious  without  its  involving  the  physical  extinction 
which  Mr.  ('onstable's  materialism  would  alone  suggest. 

Two- other  words, — rjutlotlircno  and  okthroa  (i?oAoO/^i  r.i, 
uAcVo?)-r-are  "  proi)erly  and  primarily  significant,"  says 
Mr.  Constable, "  of  utter  extermination  by  death.  They  are 
appliied  in  the  New  Testament  to  the  punishmeht  of  sinners 
hereafter:  'Every  soul  which  will  not  hear  that  prophet 
shall  be  destroyed  from  among  the  j>eople';  the  '  wicked 
shall  be  punished  with  everlasting  destnu'tion.  from  the 
presence  of  the  Lord  '  (1  Thess.  v.  3;  2  Thess.  i.  9 ;  1  Tim. 
vi.  9)." 

The  first  of  these  words  occurs  but  once  (Acts  iii.  23) ; 
the  second  is  four  times  U8e<l, — three  times  applied  to  the 
destruction  of  the  ungodly.  Exolothreno  is  given  by  Lid- 
dell  and  Scott  as  "  to  destroy  utterly."  Olethros  is  given  as 
"n//«,  destruction,  death." 

A  last  word,  not  given  by  Mr.  Constaljle,  is  katar<ieo^ 
{H(xrcx/j^£a})y  to  make  void,  of  no  effect,  to  millify.  It  is  the 
word  translated  "  destroy  "  in  1  Cor.  vi.  13  ;  xv.  2(5 ;  2  Thess. 
ii.  8  ;  Heb.  ii.  14  ;  "  come  to  nought "  in  1  Cor.  ii.  6  ;  "  abol- 
ish "  in  2  Tim.  i.  10. 

The  effect  of  this  inquiry  as  to  Greek  is  to  bring  us  back 
to  the  English,  better  satisfied  than  ever  to  abide  by  its 
decision.  We  have  found  no  cause  to  quarrel  with  Dr. 
Weymouth  when  he  tells  us  that^^'e  Greek  M'ords  in  que^;- 
tion  mean  *' destroy  "  and  "  destrilction."  As  this  is  how 
they  are  translate*!  in  our  common  version,  we  may  liave 
confidence  in  it.  The  (juestion  is  after  all  one  of  simple  un- 
derstanding of  some  common  English  words.  It  takes  no 
uncommon  education  to  arrive  at  a  satisfactory  settlement 


,1 


I 


■  -I 

■A 


THE   NEW  TESTAMENT  TEKM8. 


203 


,  and  iH 

i.s  Ih  tlic 

irid  «U»- 

.*■ 

etually. 

jpie«l  to 

■■'t 

ivr  ainl 

iciontlv 

tiiiction 

-,- 

JCHt. 

loO/JftMj 

■  ■  ' ... 

t,"  says 

•;.» 

""hey  are 

'sinners 

.* 

prophet 

wieked 

om   the 

ITim. 

Hi.  23); 

to  the 

by  Lid- 

given  as 

fifar</eOf 

[t  is  the 

■ ;  ,..;j5 

2  Thess. 

"  abol- 

iis  hack 

* 

\i  hy  its 

1 

'ith  Dr. 

in  queh- 

■  4 

is  how 

■,™ 

ay  have 

iiple  un- 

-  .-A 

akes  no 

i 

ttlement 

.J 

of  the  <iuestion  raised.  It  is  worth  while  to  have  gone 
through  the  Greek  to  have  discov-cred  this.  Our  readers 
will  go  with  us  with  the  more  a.ssuranco  and  intellincnce, 
that  we  m:iy  adhere  in  this  to  our  common  English  version. 
Meanwhile,  we  shall  close  this  chapter  with  a  remark  or 
t  wo  on  Paul's  wish  that  he  were  "  accursed  from  Christ  for 
iiis  l)rethren  ' — which  Mr.  Constable  l»rings  forward  as  "an 
•  •vact  parallel  to  the  prayer  of  Moses  already  referred  to." 
Xot  questioning  this,  our  remarks  as  to  that  prayer  of 
Moses  apply  here  with  equal  force.  I  also  agree  with  him 
that  '*  an  eternal  life  of  blasphemy  and  moral  corruption  " 
was  not  in  Paul's'  thought,  nor  implied  in  the  word  used, 
"anathema."  \X.  \» punishiuent  he  was  wishhig  to  bear,  not 
'•  bla.sphemy  and  moral  corruption."  Nor  iloes  Paul  say, "  I 
i'ould  wish,"  as  if  it  were  a  deliberate  tiling,  but  "I  tms 
wishing  " — an  impetuous  wish  at  a  certain  time  when  brood- 
ing over  Israel's  terrible  condition.  To  frame  a  doctrine 
out  of,  or  su))port  one  by,  the  expression  of  a  ntf|ment'8 
fervid  emotion  is  to  strain  Scripture,  not  inter])ret  itJ"  * 

But  Mr.  Constable  thinks  that  his  is  the  only  view  con- 
sistent with  "  the  use  of  the  term  '  accursed '  among  the 
Greeks,  by  whom  it  was  applied  to  any  animal  devoted  to 
death,  and  removed  out  oi^  the  sight  of  man,  in  order  to 
avert  calahiity."  ^It  is  granted  fully  it  is  "  devoted  to"  de- 
stru(!tion,"  an<l  occurs  thus  in  a  passage  much  more  to  Mr. 
C.'s  purpose,  though  quite  inadequate  for  it :"  if  any  man 
love  not  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  let  him  be  anathema" 
(1  Cor.  xvi.  22).  But  this  in  no  wise  shows  what  the  destruc- 
tion is,  of  which  the  animal  sacrifice  might  be  a  ti<»-ure. 
Th'.;  argument  goes  to<yar,  for  those  same  animal  sacrifices 
auK.ng  the  Hebrews  sjMp  of  Christ,  gj|d  were  equplly  '•  de- 
votei^  to  death,  and  removed  out  o^KS  sight  of  man." 
Did  the  Lofd  suffer  what'  Mr.  Constable  would  imply  by 
"  utter  death  "  ? 


ifALla  AMU  TUEUIUL^S  Ab  lU  A  JfUXUUE  «»IAX£. 


CHAPTKR  XXI. 

A  FUKTHKH  SURVEY  OF  TIIK  srlUPTUUK  TKUMR. 

Death  and  desfcruction-  are  rl«»ftrly  ScripturL'  phrases  for 
title  end  of  the  wicked.  But  th**  HrMt  is  never  extinction  as 
we  have  seen,  and  all  tliis  elasH  of  textN  are  elearly  affftin.it 
the  views  they  are  (pioted  for.  Destruction  apiin  is  the 
ruin  of  the  thing  or  hfing  of  whi<rh  it  is  pr(><li<<tv|id,  but  by 
no  means  its  passing  out  of  being,  ^t'lu*  importance  of  the 
point  is  such,  Ijowever,  tliat  w(?  shall  again  review  the  mat- 
ter in  company  with  others  of  Mr.  Constable's  school  of 
thought,  allowing  them  to  state  it  »to  us  in  their  own  way, 
and  to  bring  forward  the  arguments  by  which  they  believe 
their  own  view  triumi»h!intly  sustaine<l.  *'   •         ) 

Mr.  Ha.stings  has  given  us  a  summary  as  to  ^*The  Destiny 
of  the  Wicked"  in  a  small  tract  bearing  that  title,  and  con- 
sisting of  Scripture  texts  arranged  under  ton  different  heads. 
To  these  Mr.  Jacob  Blain^ias  a<lded  others  in  his  book, 
"Death  not  Life."  Theso^jvo  will  furnish  us  with  divisions 
under  which  we  mav^rrang*'  the  material  furnished  by  sev- 
eral other  wrlter»r''^  ^  « 

Mr.  niain  has  indeed  recalled  his  booK  since  the  change 
of  views  already  mentioned,  and  he  owns  "  ihRUjnirf,  of  the 
texts  quoted  to  prove  endlesk  loss  of  life "'  he  now  sees  "  bv 
further  research  only  to  refer  to  temporal  death  or  earthly 
judgments."  Still,  as  many  yet  hold  his  former  views,  we 
'^^^  may  use  his  headings  a^j  above  said,  as  c^onvenipnt  enough  for 
the  purlfiose  of  our  intended  review. 

To  begin  with  Mr.  Hastings'  headings  a*;  to  the  destiny 
cked\; 
They  shall   not   live  forever."     To   which  we   may 


shall  die. 


r 


£. 


A  FUKTUEK  SURVEY  OF  TUB  8CRIPTURK  TERMS.       205 


y     ■ 

rases  for 
iction  as 
'  affnbiHt. 
n  is  the 
,  but  by 
e  of  the 
the  mat- 
ch oo  I  of 
wn  way, 
believe 

Destiny 
in«l  eon- 
il  hea<ls. 
lis  book, 
livisioiis 
by  sev- 

a 

'  change 
/  of  the 
ees  "  by 
earthly 
ews,  we 
vnojh  for 

^Ipptiny 

ve   may 

r 


^  The  texts  quoted  under  the  first  we  have  already  con- 
sidered ;  for  they  are  those  which  speak  of  eternal  life,  that 
which  with  God  is  really  life.  Take  as  an  example:  "He 
that  hath  the  Son  hath  life,  and  ho  that  hath  not  the  Son  of 
y/  God  hiith  not  life"  (^John  v.  12).  Or  again,  John  vi. 
58  :  "  Except  ye  eat  the  flesh  of  the  Son  of  man,  and  drink 
His  blood,  ye  have  no  life  in  you.**  How  is  it  that  Mr. 
Hastings  does  not  see  that,  according  to  the  passages  he 
quotes,  taken  as  he  would  take  them,  not  only  the  wicked 
will  have  no  futHre  existence,  but  h<i»e  none  now  ?  That 
is  what  hi's  proof  texts  show,  if  his  system  is  correct. 
.  But  what  his  texts  do  prove  is,  that  eternal  life  is  not 
merely  existence  or  immortality,  and  that  in  the  Scripture 
language  one  may  bo  (to  use  Paul's  expression  of  the  woman 
that  lives  in  pleasure)^  1  Tim.  v.  6 :  "  dead  while  living." 
Now,  if  there  be  such  a  living  death  even  now,  as  we  are 
thus  assured  there  is,  ?rAy  not  for  eternity'/  And  if  the  be- 
liever, having  now  (as  we  have  seen)  eternal  life,  yet  enters 
into  it  as  his  general  state  hereafter,  why  may  not  the  un- 
believer, dead  now  ^fs  alas  he  is,  and  alienated  from  the  life 
.  of  God,  yet  go  into  death  as  his  final  adjudged  condition, 
by  the  sentence  of  the  Judge  hereafter? 

Mr.  Roberts,  apparently  following  Mr.  Edw.  White,*  con- 
tends against  this  application  of  I  Tim.  v.  6.  He  asks  of 
.  the  person  in  question  whether  she  was  "actually  dead,  or 
in  a  state  relating  to  death  as  a  consummation  ?  Is  it  pot 
tUe  sense  actually  expressed  in  the  words  of  Christ,  '  Let 
the  dead  bury  their  dead  'V  (Luke  ix.  60) :  the  living  said 
to  be  dead,  because  destined  to  share  the  fate  of  the  corpses 
in  question  ?     This,"  he  says  finally,  "  cannot  be  f/ainsaU/." 

But  one  would  think  it  could.  For  very  plainly,  if  that 
be  all,  the  man  whom  the  Lord  addressed  was  a?;  dead  as 
anybody  else,  and  the  language  would  be  quite  unmeaning. 
Nor  can  Mr.  Roberts  talk  about  the  second  death.  "  The 
■  dead"  who  were  to  be  buried  could  not  mean  dead  of  that 
death. 


Litpiri  Clirist,  p.  281. 


^ 


■;  'li  -X 


2m 


now,  as  it  i«-|>r()vxMl 


-r 


FACTS  AKD  THEO^lI^EJi  Ati  It)  A  f  tTTUKK  HTA-JK. 

Mori»ov€!r,  We  have  a  nimilar  |»hra»t'olo|5y  Huffii;u!nt|y  olw- 
where  U)  tlotermine  it«  meAiiiiig  v^ry  preciiK'ly,     For  in- 
Hlanoe,  where  the  Lonl  (in  John  v.  lit,   '2'y)  Hpeakn  of 'ihe  ^ 
dea«l  hearing  IIim  voice  ami  living,  He  in  plainly  not  H|ieal|iii<',S^| 
ofthofle  Hubject  to  the  firnt  <lealh,  for  the  life  mml  of  mmt'm^r' 
Ik)  in  contract  to  the  death.     If  therefore  those  Hiilyect  to 
|»hyHical  death  are  **  paflHed  from  death  to  life,"  th^eannot 
i»hy«ically   die,   which   we   know    in   not   the   truth.     The 
"  dend  "  inuHt  then  bo  considered  as  Hubjectx  of;  i)r  .sentenced  ♦  ' 
to,  the  second  death,  acconling  to  Mr.  Roberts;  but  thin 
will  not  hold  either.     Undei'  the  power  of  the  second  death 
I  hey  are  not  yet,  and  nectljru)!  in  that  sense  deliverance,  for 
the  second  death  is  the  ^jft^  of  fire.     And  again  if  we  say 
v.  nfcncrd  to  the  second  deatlr,  deliverance  from'  this  sentence 
Would  not  be  finickrinixj.     But  as  such  our  Lord  represents 
it,  the  impartation  of  a  true  life  here  and  now,  a  life  which 
is  morally  characterized  by  the  knowledge  of  the  only  true 
(fod,  and  Jesus  Christ  whom  He  has  sent.     The  death  in  > 
li  ^gii'Contrast  with  this  can  only  be  what  w«'  rightly  call  spiritual 

™  death,  '*  alienation  from  the  life  of  Ood  through  the  ignorance 

that   is  in  men,  because  6t  the  blindness  «ibiiiklJtearts  "       V 
(Kph.Jv.  IH).     Where  thili!feisnot,deatl 
Spiritual  death  i.«i^what  t^ie  .^postle  intenWuWi  [Wiiily  by  ' 
"  dead  whihj  llving.^^,  Xor  can -Mr.  Roberts  prove  that  Scrip- 
'fej?  anywhere  intends  by  the  dead  the  fiction  he  conceives, 
ing  of  the  first  <leaih-^re  never  in  Scripture  called 
t^-sue  ^;  and  he  is  merely  evading  the  force 
■pl<>"nl^^ainst  him  as  they  stand.     I  ask  again 
tlipffP'^lvlJre  be  s^^t.  Irving  death 
there  IS,  why  not  for  eternity  y 

>  Again  let  us  remind  ourselves  also  that  the  secon<l  death 
is  the  lake  of  fire,  beginning  Avhen  <le:ith  (as  it  is  onlinarily 
understooil)  ends 'and  is  no  more,  and  certaiiily  not  therefore 
its  continuance  or  repetition.  In  no  way  can  the  threaten- 
ing of  "  death  "  imply  extinction. 

'All  Mr.  Constable's  arguments  as  to  the  primary  sense  of 
\vord8  and  the  necessity  of  their  being  kept  to  their  literal 


i 


I 


>* 


■••1 


i^- 


I 


s^ 


ni\^  olae- 
For  ill 
kH  of*lh« 
N{K!:il|i 
r)f  coil 
ihjcct  to 
y cannot 
\h.  The 
i'titt»ru*c*l . 
lull  this 
nl  death 
111  CO,  Tor 
r  wo  say 

W'lltCIICO 

prt'sciilH 
to  which 
nly  true 
loath  in  • 
spiritual 
iioranoo 
oaftH  " 


iiiily  by  ' 
t  Scri])- 
ticoivos. 
L"!  calk'<l 
10  force 
k  attain 
prove*  I 

I  death    ' 
linarily 
I'retbre 
roateu-  * 

nne  of 
literal 


-«: 


■J 


>* 


A  FURTIIKR  8UBVKY  Of  TUKSCBI^URKTRIWH.       207 

\*ininj?,  which  no  nUuiy  twiiido  hiiniivlf  iiwiil  upon,  oom- 
;|>tiaoly  break  downfii  the  fa<w  of  the  fact**  of  Seripiliro.  It** 
in  ill  vain  to  urge  a  uho  of  terniH«uch  an  Macaulay  and  Hume 
in  their  character  m  historiaiiH  of  the  proHciit  wouhl  necoBsa- 
rily  re<|uire  to  make,  when  the  things  in  quostle^n  liodong  to 
that  future  whore  wo  Me  iy  dtytyftari^  hi  a  riddrf«  (Jod  haa 
not  mocked  um  indeed,  nor  iwed  words  in  an  iwareal  or  un- 
truthful HeiiHo,  Kio  Holoinn  HtateiuontH  arc  n®t  unAtted 
HiirOly  to  convoy  a  moaning  which  the  general  douHont  of 
ChriHten<lom  une<juivocally  attachoH  to  them.  A»d  writem 
Huch  as  Mr.  C(2tu4ahle  show  plainly  that  they  are  not,  by 
the  way  they  conHtantly  peroert  that  moaning  in  order  to 
force  it  into  contradiction  with  the  Bible  tennft.  ThuH 
(Joodwyii  says  :  *'  l(, death  does  mean  ceaseless  suflRwing  in 
///«',  thore^  can  bo  no  confidence  in  expression  by  words "; 
and  so  Constable,  "death  is  made  to  mean  its  direct  opp6- 
site— life  " ;  and  so  Dobnoy  asks,  "  How  was  Adam  to  ua* 
derstand  that  death  meant  life — cndle^n  life — endless  life  m 
tort/ieM  ?"'  .  *  -       m 

But  who  asserts  such'  a  moaning  ?  The  second  doth^e 
the  lake  of  fire,  and  th"terof<yro  torment  cannot  be  oxolllded 
from  the  idc^  of  it,  as  wo  have  soon.  But  death  inUaelf 
doois  .not  *' moan  "  torment  even  here.  It  means  anything 
bjl^"  life."  It  means  separation  from  the  Blessed  Soarce 
of  life :  th«t  "  alienation  from  the  life  of  God  ^  on  msn's 
side,  which  lis  spiritual  'death,  meeting  its  end  in  God's  final 
withdrawal  on  the  other.  And  as  God's  withdrawal  caimpt, 
mean  inditierenco,  and  as  Ho  cannot  cease  to  be  the  Moral 
Governor  of  His  creatures,  it  implies  the  manifestatiolL.-.. 
of  that  eternal  <li8plea.^ure,  which  the  lake  of  fire  is. 

This  may  suffice  to  answer  Mr.  Minton's  question  as  to 
what  life  the  wicked  can  lose  in  the  day  of  judgment,  and 
which  he  sett^les  by  a  process  of  exhaustion  can  lie  only 
phystt^al  life,  ^e  might  answer  that,  if  that  be  the  judg- 
ment, surely  it  would  be  release  to  many,  and  scarcely,  in 
comparison  of  preceding  anguish,  judt/hient  at  ail.  But-  his 
question  is  founded  upon  a  misapprehension.     We  have  seen 


i 


'. 


S 


T 


I 


•  ■'  ,-'1 


r^'i^'i^-.' 


(1 


I    I 


(  <.. 


t-v 


4         r 


«> 


(      i 


^^■v^ 


x: 


'26s 


■  (I  ,  ■■ 

FACTS  AKD  THEORIES  AS  tO  A  FUTUKK  STA'rE. 


N 


that  the  righteous  "enter  into  life  »  in  the  world  to  come, 
and  yet  that  that  doe's  not  imply  that  they  have  not  got  it 
here';  and  similarly  the  wicke<l  enter  into  (lr„f/i,  fi,ul  it  in 
all  its  awful  reality,  in  that  Judgnuu.t  day.  It  is  their  whole 
condition,  unrelieved  and  unmitigated  as  heforo  it  might  be 
aye,  even  for  the  rich  manor  for  Cain.  The  resurrection 
Ibr.just  or  unjust  alone  can  give  them  their  full  capacity 
for  enjoyment  or  for  suffering.  The  resurrection  of  the 
Wicked  jjrecedes  their  judgment  to  the' second  death. 

W^i-raaypass  on  to  consider  Mr.  Hastings'  third^head, 
with  which  we  may  take  as  merely  synonymous  with  it  in 
tjjie  original,  his  fifth.     These  are— 
"3.  They  shall  perish.;'  > 

'<  5.  They  shall  be  destroyed."  • 

Mr.  Hastings  depends  mainly  if  not  entirely  here  upon 
what  he  considers  the  simple  force  of  the  words  "destroy  " 
etc.  Says  Mr.  Jacob' Blain  :  "If  destroy  is  sometimes  ap- 
plied-to  calamities  on  earth,  it  still  means  the  enmn^/  of  a 
thmg,  as  of  prosperity,  liberty,  country,  character,  etc.  •  so 
to  say  It  does  not  mean  the  ending  of  the  thing  to  which  it 
refers  is/a4r." 

So  it   seems  a  question  of  some  simple  English  words 
which  strangely  enough,  we  do  not  understand.     Our  trans- 
lators used  however  both  destroy  and  perish  for  ruin  Where 
tlje  thing  remained  in  ruins,  and  di.l  not  come  to  an  end 
Ihe  bottles  burst  by  the  new  wine  are  thus  said  to  be  "  per- 
ished," as  we  have  seen.     They  were  ruined,  looking  at  the 
ongmal  purpose  for   which   they  Were  <lestined.     And  so 
though  the  righteous   "perished,"   he  entered  into  peace' 
So  again  we  have,  "the  land  perisheth,"  "the  valley  also 
shall    perish;''   so   over  anc!  over  again    is   it    said  that 
Israel  was  to  be  -  destroye<l,"-^nil  after  this  had  come  upon 
her  her  captivity  was  to  be  turned  (Deut.  xxviii.,  xxx  )     The 
constant  reference  to  death  agrees  entirely  with  this.     In 
none  of  these  cases  is  there  an  end  of  the  thing  destroyed 

tl';   r'uf  V°r^'\''  ^"^'"  end  somewhere,  must  say 
that  If    the  land  perishes,"  the  .ta(e  of  prosperity  do..,  .n.^ 


iTE. 

to  come, 
not  got  it 

find  it  in 
lieir  whole 
might  be 
surrection 
11  capacity 
on  of  the 
th. 

ird^  head, 
vith  it  in 


ere  upon 
destroy," 
times  ap- 
^ifi[/  of  a 
etc. ;  so 
which  it 

1  words, 
ur  trans- 
n  \vhere 
an  end. 
^e  "  per- 
?  at  the 
And  sOy 
3  peace, 
ley  also 
iid  that 
lie  upon 
).    The 
lis.     In 
itroyed. 
ust  say 
>£S,-and 


^f 


A  FURTHEK  SURVEY  OF  THB  SCRIPTURE  TERMS.       209 

this  is  what  is  meant  by  *'  tht;  l:iu<l  " !  "In  the  case  of  an  ar- 
ticle lost " — the  same  word  in  tlu?  original,-^-''  poMftift/on.  is  de 
stroycd  "  !  and  so  on.  The  case  is  very  plain  ilial  destnic- 
tJon  does  not  mean  "annihilation"  in  ^(!//// of  these  examples. 
But  there  is  one  text  which  we  must  specially  look  at  in 
this  connection,  and  a  very  important  one  it  is.  Mr.  Minton 
has  given  it  the  fullest  examination  that  I  have  seen,  and 
therefore  we  may  best  follow  his  argument  as  to  it.  It  is  in 
his  "Way  Everlasting  "  (pp.  27-33),  and  follows  what  he 
calls  th(^  "settlement"  by  "exhaustion"  of  what  life  the 
wicked  have  yet  to  lose  in  the  day  of  judgment.  This 
we  have  i^een  he  decides  must  be  nattwul  life,  and  he  SToes 
on': —  :  ;  ;.;  V ' 

"  A0.  is  not  that  just  the  lifo  which  our  Lord  Himself  precisely 
defines  to  be  what,  </'///  be  taken  away  from  them?  'Fear  not 
tliem  Avhieh  kill  the  body  and  are  not  able  to  kill  the  soul  ;  but 
rather  fear  Him  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  soul  and  body  in 
hell '  (Matt.  X.  2Hj.  Now  I  i>ut  it  to  yom- conscience  whether  you 
can  find  a  more  distinct  and  jiositive  utterance  than  that  upon 
any  subj(!ct  wliatevcn-  in  tlie  whole  Bible.  Would  it  be  possible 
for  any  Inunau  being  who  i-ead  that  text  Avith  an  unprejudiced 
mind,  to  have  the  smallest  doubt  as  to  its  meaning  ?  Does  it  not 
distinctly  threaten  that  God  will  do  to  Ijotli  body  and  soul  that 
which  man  can  do  to  the  body,  but  is  '  not  able 'to  do  to  the 
soul— '^Z//' them  ? "  ,         '  v>i 

No,  Mr.  Mhiton,  it   does   not.     The  word    is  expressly  v 
altered  to  avoid  saying  so^.     And  what  is  not  said  here  is 
not  said' any  where  moreover  in  Scripture.     The  soul  m  nether 
''killed."     Let  Mr.  Minton  say,  what  would  be  the  result 
if  it  were  said  : — 

"  And  what  is  kiUing  ?  Why,  depriving;  of  life.  While,  the 
body  retains  one  spark  of  life  of  any  sort  or\lescriptiou,  it  is  not 
killed  ;  and  while  the  soul  retains  one  .spark  of  life  of  any  sort  or 
description,  <7  is  not  killed." 

,  I  quite  agree  with  him.     And  how  then  can  he  account  ^ 
for  the  fact,  that  having  used  this  decisive  word  in  the  first 
clause  of  the  sentence,  tiie  Loi'd  refuses  it  for  the  second 
I'»''t  V — Certainly  not  without  sonie  reason  for  it.  He  turns 


210 


FA(;rs  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUIlE  STATK. 


!  I 


asKlo  from  saying  what  would  seem  the  most  natnml  lhin<. 
for  Ilim  to  say,  an<L  instead  of  using  again  the  word  ''  kill  " 
which  lie  had  jusfused,  He  substitutes  "destroy"  for 
"  kill."  \  ■ 

Nor  only  so.     Mr.  Minton  cannot  find  this  word  kill  ap- 
plied anywhere  to  the  soul  or  to  future  punishnuw.t.     It  is 
rejected  as  unfit  both  here  and  everywhere.     And   T  ask,  V 
why  y    Why  does  the  Lord  substitute  "destroy  "  for  ''  kill  '"^^2 
Would  it  be  believed,  after  Mr.   Minton  telling  us  so  «4^ 
phatieally  what  "  killing  "  is,  and  how  decisive  of  the  cont^C^ 
versy  m  his  favor,  that  he  has  the  boldness  to  reply  "^7,-' 
^Jouhtedlu  to  lacreas>^  theforeeof  the  threat,',, in. f.     It  'is  the 
same  thing,  but  expressed  by  a  stronger  woi;d— in  fact  the 
strongest  word  that  can  be  used  " ! 

Now  the  wonl  «  kill "  is  only  employed  for  takin-  fife 
and  scarcely  ever  in  any  figurative  sense  at  all.     Mr.  Minton 
appeals  to  Liddell  and  Scott  as  his  authority.     We  will 
accept  the  ap])eal,  an<l  contrast  the  words.     The  latter  word 
in  the  verse,  apollu„d  {^an6\\vii{)  is  indeed  given  as  "to  de 
stroy  utterly,   kill,  slay,  murder,"  but  it  is  added  that  it 
means  "  very  fre<iuently  in  all  sorts  of  relations,  to  destroy 
nan,    spoil,    waste,   s,juander,"  and    in   the   middle    form' 
not   only  "to  perish,  die,  lalV'lbut  "also  simply,  to    f<ai 
into  rum,  be  undone,"  an.l  even  "to  be  wretched  or  mh- 
ei-abley 

Now  compare  the  other  word  apoktehio  {,{noHTitvc^  and    * 
we  find  the  only  meanings  given  to  be  "  to  kill,  slav,  smite 
to^eath,  to  put  to  death,  to  wearv  to  death,  torn'ient  "- 
but  this  last  metaphorical  use  a, very  rare  one,  and  in  Scrii)- 
ture  never  employed.     Now  I  ask  Mr.  Minton,-I  ask  any 
honest  man,-if  our  Lord  had  <lesigned  to  use  a  word  which  . 
should  unequivocally  set  forth  the  annihilation  of  the  soul 
whK.h  would  have  >een  the  fitter  for  his  purpose,  the  one 
>v  )*ch  in  Scripture  language  has  no  other  sense  than  that  of 
taking  hfe,  or   the  one    which  is  ,e,-y  jVc^iuentlu  used    in 
other  senses? 

And  ev<.M 'this,  decisive  as  it  ought  to  be,  does  not  put    


■m 


mil  ihiiiuf 
nl  ''kill," 
roy  "   for 

<1  kill  ap- 
it.  It  is 
I'l  T  :isk, 
•"kiU"-i,j 


It  is  the 
fact  the 


mo;  fife, 
■  Alinton 
>Ve  will 
er  word 
"to<le- 
that   it 
lestroy, 
!    forin, 
to    fall 
or  //k's- 

<»),an(l    * 
',  smite 
ent  "— 
I  Scrip- 
isk  any 
I  which  . 
e  soul, 
lie  one 
hat  of 
sod    in 


W 


i^" 


A  FURTHEK  SURVEY  OF  THE  SCRIPTURE  TERMS.       211 

the  argument  in  its  Strongest  form.  For  if  we  will  be  at.  a 
little  pains  to  go  beyond  the  lexicon,  and  inquire  for  our- 
selves the  force  of  the  terms  in  Scripture,  we  shall  find— and 
I  do  not  doubt  the  same  to"  be  true  elsewhere  than  in  Scrip- 
ture—that apolhunl  is  ifEV-ER  the  word  Used  sitnpft/  to  ex- 
press the  taking  of  lifV  That  may  be  (often  is,  no  doulit) 
fieecsmri///  implied;  but  that  is  quite  another  thing.  It  is 
never  once  translated  "kill"  in  our  version,  only  once  (in 
the  middle) '' die,"  where  "  perish  "  would  be  better  (John 
xviii.  14),  and  is  actually  i)ut  alongside  of  kill  hi  the  same 
sentence  to  convey  a  ditferent  thought  (John  x.  ID).  The 
more  aiiy^one  will  study  the  Scripture  use  of  the  words,  the 
more  he  will  be  convinced  that  the  very  opposite  of  Mr. 
Mhfton's jassertion  is  the  truth,  and  that  the  decisive  word 
to  conve^  the  annihilationist  meanhig  is  the  very  word  that  4 
the  Loi,-d  n-jects,  and  deliberately  rejects,  after  having  used  it 
in  the  bi*gi„„ing  of  the  very  sentence  from  which  He  rejects 
it  at  the  end.  ' 

I  close  ih  Mv.  Minton's  own  words  that  "  it  would  really  i 
seofn  as  if  the  force  of  demonstration  could  no  further  go." 

We  may  pass  on  then  to  Mr.    Hastings'  next  class  of 
.  texts:    :      '        :  ,  , 

'  "4.  They  shall  be  cut  off."     ' 

.  AH  that  I've  quotes  hi  this  way  is  from  the  Old  Testament, 
an<l  refers,  as  the  <]uotations  themselves  prove,  to  the  extir- 
pation of  the  wicked  out  0/  the  earth  simply,  without  in- 
timating their  after-condition.  Thus  Psa.  xxxvii.,  speakin»r 
of  millennial  days :  "  for  evil  doers  shall  Jie  cut  off;  but  those 
that  wait  upon  the  Lord,  they  shall  inherit  the  earth." 
Again,  Nal.mn  i.  ir>:  "  ()  Judah.  .  .  the  wicked  shall  no 
more  p<iM  thromjh  thre  :  he  is  utterly  cut  off.''  Or  again, 
Prov.  ii.  '11:  "But  the  wicked  shall  be  cut  o&  fm,u  the 
earthy  a>id  the  transgressors  shall  be  rooted  out  of  it:' 

There  are  few  more  frequent  causes  of  mistake  with  that 
class  of  annihilationists  tp  which  Hastings,  Miles  (4rant, 
Blain,  and  Roberts,  among  others,  belong,  than  this  con- 
f(Minding  of  the  destruction  of  ihe  wicked  out  of  the  earth 


|)Ut 


212        FACTS  AXi>  TUEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUUE  STATE. 


in  order  to  the  great  predictc'<l  l)l».'ssing  for  it  with  the  eter- 
nal judgment  when  the  earth  and  heavens  flee  away.  They 
believe. in  no  heavenly  portion  of  the  saints,  nothing  more 
than  a  sort  of  "  heavenly  eoiuUtion  ''  upon  earth.  For  then> 
conscfpienriy  destruction  out.  of  the  earth  is  apparently  in- 
distingniishable  from  final  judgment.  We  shall  have  to 
consider  the  difference  hereafter,  hut  the  passages  quoted 
speak  for  themselves. 

The  same  remarks  apply  to  his  sixth  class  : — 
"  6.  They  shall  bo  consumed." 

Take  Zeph.  i.  2,  .i,  for  example :  "  T  will  utterly  consume 
•   all  things_/;y»yt  offh,'  Inwf,  saith  the  Lord.     I  will  consume 
man  and  beast;  I  will  consume  th(^  fowls  of  heaven,  and  the 
^    fishes  of  the  sea,  and  the  stumbling  blocks  with  the  wicked 
and  I  will  cut  off  man  from  oj^f  the  laml,  saith  the  Lord." 
'  So  Psa.'  civ.  ^) :   "  Let  the  sinners  be  consumed  out  of  the 
earth,  and  let  the  wicked  be  no  more."     These  are  some  of 
Mr.  Hastings'  own  texts  adduced  for  the  annihilation  of  the 
wicked  !     The  cause  must  be  weak  that  rcrjuires  such  argu- 
ments. 

Mr  Hastings'  next  three  heads  I  must  leave  for  after  con- 
sideration.    They  are  these  :— 

"7.  The  agent  of  punishment  shall  be  fire  an d<« brimstone. 

^'  ^.  They  shall  be  burned  ui>  root  and  branch. 

"9.  Their  punishment  shall  take  place,  not  at  death,  but 
at  the  coming  of  Christ" 

To  the  tenth  again  the  same  remarks  apply.     It  is  all  the 
earthly  judgnipnt  \Yhich  pre(;edes  millennial  blessing.     And 
upon  the  principle  of  interpretation  which  must  be  adopted 
in  order  to  make  texts  such  as  these  apply  to  the  final  ex- 
tinction of  the.  wicked,  I  could  not  only  pi'ove  that  Enoch 
was  annihilated  (because  he  "  vxs  not ")  but  could  find  the 
doctrine  of  annihilation  in  most  books  that  were  ever  writ- 
ten.    According  to  Mr.  fl..  if  1  but  find  Israel  assured  that 
"  they  that  war  against   thee  shsill  be  as  XOTHING,  and  as  a 
THING  OF  j^ouGHT,"  or  "  that  they  shall  diligently  consider 
the  place  [of  the  wicked]  afed  it  shall  not  kh;'  I  am  en- 


■•'i 


A.TE. 

:-h  the  eter- 
-ay.  They 
hing  more 
For  then> 
•iirently  in- 
1  have  to 
jes  quoted 


7  consume 
I  consume 
n,  and  the 
le  wicked, 
tie  Lord." 
'Ut  of  the 
some  of 
on  of  the 
uch  ariju- 

after  con- 

'imst'one. 

eath,  but 


is  all  the 
g.  And 
adopted 
final  ex- 
t  Enoch 
find  the 
.er  writ- 
red  that 
and  as  a 
consider 
[  am  en- 


■ ) 


:i 


M 


A  FUKTHEK  SUUVKY  OF  TUE  SCUIPTUltK  TERMS.       213 

titled  to  put  these  expressions  in  small  capit:ils,  and  consider 
them  conclusive  proof  that  the  wicked  sire  annihilated  I 
Once  more  I  ask,  what  can  I  think  of  such  arguments  as 
these,  or  of  the  cause  that  needs  them  ? 
jVfr.  Blain  adds  to  these  quotations  :— 

11.  "Slay,  slain,  kill."  All  his  texts  as  us'ual  applying  to 
earthly  j\idgm^t8'.' t 

12.  "Blot  out."  Here  he  quotes  Psa.  Ixix.  28,  which  is 
earthly  judgment,  and  Rev.  iii.  5,  which  has  roference  to  the 
peculiar  case  of  those  in  Sardis  who  had  "  a  name  to  live  ' 
on  earth,  showing'that  it  applies  to  the  projeftsio/t.  of  eternal 
life.     Man  had,  as  it  were,  written  those  names  in  the  book 

,of  life.     Christ  would  blot   them  out,  where    it  was   only 
that.     What  eternallife  is  we  bave  already  seen. 

13.  "Hewn  down."  Here  be  quotes  ^Nlatt.  iii.  10;  vii. 
19.  But  compare  as  to  the  foreo  of  the  expression  Dan.  iv. 
14  :  it  does  not  at  all  imply  even  the  taking  away  of  natural 
life.  Hi*!  argument  about  the  fire  we  may  see  th(;  force  of 
by  and  by ;  but  certainly  if  "  hewn  down  "  itself  signifies 
the  extinction  of  natural  life,  t^iere  would  be  little  cause  to 
dread  the  "<fire  "  fiftcnnards. 

14.  '*  Lose  life."  These  texts  have  been"  already  con. 
s^dered.        •  t  :> 

"End."  Mr.  B.  remarks,  "If  the  wicked  are  immortal, 
they  have  //o  6«r?,  and  this  language  is  absurd."  Rut  of 
what  then,  or  of  whom,  is  "everlasting  life  "  (according  to 
Rom.  vi.  22)  "  the  end  "  ?  If  everla.sting  life  be  an  end  in 
any  way,  whether  of  a  saint  or  of  his  works,  then  "  end  "is  not 
necessarily  cessation  of  existence.  A  man's  final  estate  is 
his  end,  and  the  end  of  the  wicked  As  "  destnu^tion  "  ;  InU 
a:nnihilation  it  is  not. 

As  to  Rsa.  vii.  0,  '•  O  let  the  wickedness  of  the  wicked 
come  to  an'end  !  '*  it  is  the  groan  of  a  soul  feeling  the  stroufr 
hand  of  oppression,  and  has  no  reference  Jo  eternal  judg- 
ment.' ■  ./'''',' 

Mr.  Blain's  following  texts  (except  one)  have  all  reference 


to  that  clearing  out  of  evil  from  th«  earth,  which  he  every- 


ill 


i!  i  ^ 


■j 


214         FACTS  AND  THEOIIIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

where  seetns  to  overlook.  Yet  it  is  a  most  real  thing,  and 
figures  largely  in  thp>'or<l  of  prophecy,  as  what  is  to  take 
place  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord,  before  the  earth  shall  have 
its  blessing  under  the  dominion  of  the  Prince  of  peace. 

As  to  the  iw^jy  tliese  texts  are  <|Uoted  I  have  the  same 
prcjtest  to  make  m  general,  as  I  had  with  regard  to  Mr. 
Con.stal)le\s  (piotations  before.     The  citations  are  loose,  ran- 
<l!)m  and  careless.'    They  are  heaped  upon  one  another,  as 
if  to  make  imj)ression  by  theic  numbers,  And  overwhelm  the 
juilgment,  rather    than   invite    ins])ection.       Words    and 
phrases  are  taken  from  their  context,  an'l  assorted  in  the 
•  fashion  of  a  eoncordj^ce,  with  no  discrimination  of  the  texts 
in  which  they  are  found.     The  examination^'  of  them  leaves 
the  impi*ession  of  unmistakable  carelessnesH  in  the  use  of 
Scripture,  an«l  a  most  thorough  trill  to  jjush  t(,>  the  utmost 
every  expression  that  in  the  Ica.st  may  seem  to  favor  their 
doctrine.     Against  it  I  appeal  to  the  ve,iy  texti*  they  have 
cited.     They  need  but  a  little  i)atient  Qxamination,  with  sin-- 
gleness  of  purpose  afid  Waiting  upon  God,  to  give  true  'and 
imambiguous   testimony  as   the  word   of  the  blcssc'd  God 
who  cannot  lie,  cannot  fill  the  soul  that  looks  in  faith  to 
Ilim.  .   -      . 

N«»TK. — Jlessis.  CoMsLabIc and  Wliitr  both  jh-pss an argumpnt  beip  from 
certain  i»as.sai;e.s  in  Plato's  PIwimIo  in  wiiich  somoof  tin-  Nt'W  'ffsl'titnent 
words  are  used  by  him  to  give  tlie  idea  of  tlie  literal  destructi«)n  or  "  tx- 
tiiii'tion  of  thu  nDitl.''  liiil  Plato's  use  of  tln'  wonls  carwMil,  avail  to  set 
aside  a  use  of  them,  j»rove<i  as  we  have  proveil  ii  from  the  New  Testa- 
ment itself.  .Si)ite  of  their  protest,  it  is  well  known  tlial  many  words 
attain  a  moral  or  spiritual  sit,rnificance  in  Scripture,  which  will  be 
vainly, souizht  for  in  classieal' Greek.  They  will  hardly  deny  this,  as  it 
tan  so  easily  bejtroved.  Tha't  Plato  should  use  some  of  these  words 
therefore,  in  a  physical  sense,  while  Scripture  uses  them  in  a  spiritual, 
is  no -rVreat.  cause  of  wonderment.  Let  them  meet  frankly  the  ar<,'ument 
from  Scripture,  and  riot  settle  the  question  by  appeal  to  the  terms  of 
Greek  [dulosophy. 


X.:' 


THE  PROVISIONAL  CHARACTER  OP   DEATH.  215 


CHAPTER  XXII. 


,'v 


1, 


THE  PROVISIONAL  CHARACTER  OF  DEATH. 

We  now  come  to  look  at  a  point  of  great  iiiiportance  in 
raiiiiy  respects,  and  which  has  been  in<lee<l  already  spoken 
of,  but  not  fully  proved  or  dwelt  upon  as  it  deserves.  I 
mean  the  provisional  and  temporary  character  of  the  first 

death.  |l     ^' 

We  have  already  argujd  that  the  penalty  attaching  to  the 
eating  of  the  forbidden  tree  was  simply  this,  and  did  not  at 
all  (as  so  many  beside  Mr.  Constable  assume)  include  in  it 
"  all  that  God  purposed  to  inflict  upon  Adam  and  his  pos- 
terity in  case  of  transgression  "  !  Where  is  the  least  warrant 
for  this?  The  actual  result  to  us  of  that  primal  sin  we 
have  had  the  apostle  state  to  us,  and  that  is  (so  far  as  in- 
fliction from  God  is  concerned)  physical  death  as  His  stamp 
upon  a  fallen  condition,  His  judgment  of  a  race  corrupted 
from  its  beginning. 

Herein  lay  of  course  the  possibility,  nay,  probability,  of  a 
final  sentence.  But  God  is  in  no  haste  with  judgment ;  and 
this  was  the  beginning  of  tlie  world's  history,  not  the  close 
of  it.  Who,  save  for  the  need  of  making  a  system,  could 
imagine  the  beneficent  Creator  of  man,  at  once,  and  for  the 
personal  ottence  of  our  first  parents,  adjudging  all  their  de- 
scendants to  eternal  death  i  Scripture  at  any  rate  has  naught 
of  it,  and  we  are  seeking  to  follow  Scripture  in  its  simplest 
^cts  and  t^tutements. 

It  may  be  urged,  however,  that  death  followed  as  one  of 
these  facts  and  that  that  shows  that  Adam's  posterity  shared 
in  Adam's  judgment; 

But  that  is  a  very  different  thing,  as  a  little  consideration 
will  assure  us.     Death  was  indeed  God's  judgment  upon  the 


race  as  vitiated  and  corrupt,  but — inasmuph  as  it  was  cor- 
rupted  by  another's  sin  and  not  its  own, — a  judgment  which 


t  f 

if 


210         FA(  TS  AN'l)  THEOIUKS  AS  TO  A   PiltUKE  STATE. 

was  :i  iiiorcifu;  diseiplim.  for  it,  :i  witness  to  the  fallen  crea- 
ting, of  its  own  condition,  an  appeal  to  it  by  its  own  frailty 
an.l  hdplossncss  to  Io,,k  liij^her  than  itself  for  hclil,  an  ad 
monition    so    to    nuinln'r  its  days  that  its  heart  might   be 
applied  to  wisdom.     What  should  we  do  without  the'thorns 
and  thistles  which  grow  ouX  of  the  ground  cursed  for  man's 
sake  y     AVhat  should  we  do  without  the  need  of  the  sweat 
of  the  brow  ?     What,  without  the  ministry  of  death  itself? 
Surely  a  blessing  is  in  this  curse ;  it  is  an  evil  which  is  good ; 
the  discipline  of  the  Father  of  spirits  for  our  profit,  chasten- 
ing of  a  holy  han.l  that  we  may  be  partakers  of  His  holiness, 
and  in  its  own  nature  contrasted  with  that  final  sentence 
which  is  "  Depart  from  me,  ye  cursed."     The  first  death  and 
the  second  death  are  contrasts  and  not'th&same. 

Such  is  its  nature,  if  we  consider  it  as  the  fruit  simply  of 
Adam's  sin,  its  legacy  to  his  descendants.     It  was  the  wise 
and  tender  foresight  of  Ilira  who  saw  the  floodgates  of  evil 
pierced,  and  the  awful  outburst  of  iniquity^,  before  it  came, 
and  ordained  this  as  its   corrective,  as  0ne  who  did  not 
intend  to  give  up  Ilis  creatures  to  it,  to  perish  through  help- 
lessness   alone.     If  by  one  man  sin  wais  entering  into  the 
world,    then   "death  by  sin"    was  the   Divine  ordinance.. 
And  rigiit  and  good  every  prodigal  proelaims  it  whom  the 
j>ressure  of  hunger  causes  to  think  pf  a,Father's  house  :— • 
every  psalmist  that  ever  M'as,  witli  Israel's  sweet  Psalmist 
when  he  owns   "Before  I  was.aftticted  I  went  astray,  but 
no\v  I  have  kept  Thy  words."       .^ 

This  is  deatli  as  an  appendage  to  a  fallen  condition;  but 

if  wo  len  it  there,  there  would  be  manifest  incongruity  with 

mueli  of  Sci-i].ture  and  of  fact  as  well.     In  order  To  hav^e  the 

(  whole  statement  and  the  full   harmonious,.  trut>,  we  must 

look  further.     We  must  distinguish  between  death  as  we 

should  rightly  consider  it,  as  introduced   into   the  world 

through  anot/ier^s  sin,  and,  on  the  otl>er  hand,  as  brought 

upon   us  through  our  own   personal   transgressions,     The 

Old  Testament  iff  full  of  this  laslliubject,  which  Is  found 

also  m  the  New.     At  Corinth,  where  thev  were  profonin- 


-  .J-: 


THE  PIIOVISIONAL  CUAirAOTEK  OP  DKATH. 


217 


the  Lord's  supper,  many  were  weak  and'  sickly  among  them, 
and  many  slept  (1  Cor.  xi.  30).  And  the  apostle  John  tells 
us  of  a  "  sin  unto  death"  for  which  h^  does  not  say  that  oni^ 
should  pray  (I  John  v.  16). 

But  the  Old  Testament^jJ  is  that  insists  ever  upon  death 
as  the  penalty  of  j)ersonai  transgression,  and  this  is  just 
what  the  text  means  on  all  sides  so  little  understood,  "  the 
soul  that  sinneth  it  shall  die."  Even  this  is  not  the  Htjeo)id 
death,  which  the  Old  Testament  knowf^jiothing  of.  It  is  a 
sinner  dying  in  his  sins  and  under  judgment,  and  which 
leaves  its  boding  shadow  upon  the  future  beyond  <leath. 
But  we  must  reserve  this  subject  for  another  chapter. 

Death  is  then  a  provisional,  not  a  final,  sentence.  It  is  a 
corrective  discipline  from  the  Father  of  spirits  in  view  of 
the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  world.  It  is  in  its  own  niature 
temporary  and  to  pass  away,  as  Scripture  declares  it  will. 
,A8  the  separation  of  soul  ami  body,  it  is  a  necessary  hin- 
drance to  the  full  blessing  of  the  righteous,  and  a  hindrance 
also  to  the  full  judgmemot  the  wicked.  Fi>j-  tlic  righteous 
and  for  the  wicked  alike,  although  with  opposite  effect,  it  is 
at  the  resurrection  finally  done  away.  , 

Let  us  look  at  some  Scriptures  which  in  this  way  get  their 
proper  significanci^,  and  in  this  way  only. 

First,  the  Lord's  answer  to  the  Sadducees  touchitig  the 
resurrection  (Luke  xx.  27-38).  These  Sadducees  were  con- 
sistent in  then*  unbelief,  and,  as  they  denied  resurrection, 
they  denied  the^  existence  also  of  the  spirit  in  tlie  separate 
state ;  an<l  it^is  this  last  that  the  Lord  takes  up  and  proves, 
in  order  by  it  to  prove  the  resurr«t?lion. 

God  says  at  the  bush,  '*  I  am  the  God  of  AbrahaMi,  and 
the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  Go<l  of  Jacob."  Buti,JpWe  were 
then  in  that  relationship  to  them,  they  must  be  existent  for 
Ilim  t<»  be  so.  lie  c«mld  not  be  the  God  of  the  Jcnd  (m 
the  Sadducee  sense  «»f  death,  the  non-existent),  they  must  be 
in  some  sensfc  alive,  alive  to  IHm^  and  so  they  are. 

But  then  this  apparently  proves  but  a  s'eparate  existence 
of  the  spirit  in  <ieath,  and  that  has  ever  been  the  ditficuky 


;5» 


218 


FACTS  AND  TlIKOUlfia  AS  lO  A  l^UTUllE  STATE. 


about  it.  How  does  proving  the  existence  of  Abraham^ 
Isaac  and  Jacob  in  the  soparato  state. prpvc  resurreaioii  ?' 
.  Very  simply  after  all.  For  what  is  «k>jHh  upon  this  view 
of  it''?  Ma'hifestly  the  infringement  of  God's  creative  plan. 
He  had  not  made  man  a  spirit  merely,  but  a  »[>'mt  k^toilied. 
A  spirit  <?wembbdied  could  not  be  God's  intentid^^^pr  His 
gifts  and  calling  are  without  repentance.  The  bo^j/  tliere- 
Jbre  miiat  rise  again,  *°  •  . 

And  this  is  no  forced  argument.     I  doubt  not  it  was-  one 
well  understood  in  that  day,  when  men' wore  accustomed 
to  a  sort  of  reasoning  which  the  clear  light  of  the  New  Te»-~ 
tament  (wherein  life  and   incorruptionl^^ye  been  brought 
to  light)  has  set  aside  as  unnecessary  ti^fipso  who  have  it. 
But  that  this  is  no  forced  argumeiitwe  have  the  best  possi- 
ble evidence ;  for  it  is  3Ir.  Constable's  own  condusim  (per- 
feet  Sadducee  as  he  is  as  to  the  separate  stat/6)~krto  Vhat 
the  separate  existence  of  the  spirit  might  imply.     We  have 
(luoted  his  words  already,  but  will  cite  them  again  to  show 
how  he  considers  this  linked  by  Implication  witli  resurrectit^n 
of  the  dead.     "If- the  first  death."  he  says,  "is  consis^enjb 
with  man's  in  fact  not  dying,  but  continuing  to  live  in  regard 
to  his  most  important  part,  whose  surniiud  mw,  a^f^n  he 
supposed  to  imply  the  restoration  of  the  hoih/  to  llfi^'  etc. 
That  is  what  it  really  does,  and  we  may  well"  belie/e  it  no 
forced  or  unnatural  conclusion,  ^^:hon  we  find  fro^  such  a 
quarter  so  decided  a  testimony  as  to  its  n.itunilne/s. 

Take  an  illustration  from  a  flua  before  our  iyos.     The 
preservation  of  the  Jews  as  a  nation  after  ni'ar  ei«rhteen 
hundred  years  of  dispersion  into  all  lands  is  one  of  the 
standing  miracles  whereby  God  rebukes  the  unbeUef  of  His ' 
prophetftj  word.     But  what  does  it  argue  to  those  who  be- 
lieve m  His  hand  as  guidmg  surely  and  not  doubtfully,  all 
things  according  to  His  resistless  counsels  ?    If  we  must 
say,  this  is  the  finger  of  God,  to  what  does  it  point  ?    Surely 
to  that  7iat tonal  resurrection  from  the  dead,  which  yet  in 
His  own   time  He  will  accomplish.     This  is  the  simple-  . 
prompt  conclusion  of  faith.    It  may  serve  to  illustrate  the 


THE  PROVISIONAL  CHARACtEH  OF  DEAXn. 


2id 


^ 


(•onnoction  of  thoupfht  between  the  belief  in  tlie  Heparate 
spirit  and  tbe  resurrection  of  the  body. 

And  >ve  may  note  tliat  the  insi)ired  hiHtorian  seems  in 
some  way  to  connect  them,  when,  l*aid  having  ])roclaimed 
himself  in  the  council  a  Pharisee  and  the  son  of  a  Pharisee, 
he  a<ld8  in  explanation  :  "  for  the  Sadducees  say  that  there  is 
no  resurrection^  neither  angel,  nor  sinrit  ;  but  the  Pharisees 
confess  both." 

But  we  must  not  forget  that  there  is  another  way  in  which 
the  words  of  our  Lord  are  attempted  to  be  explained.  In- 
deed, we  have  already  hcanl  Mr.  Roberts  upon  the  subject. 
Let  us  now  listen  to  Mi*.  Dobney.-.  He  has  taken  particular 
iiains  to  establish  the  sense  in  which  the  passage  is  to  bo 
understood.  He  says  of  the  explanation  of  it  in  the  way  we 
have  given  :  ''With  us  it  would  be  a  striking  and  satisfac- 
tory [H-oof  of  a  continuance  of  conscious  existertce  after 
.death — but  no  proof  whatever  of  d  resurrect  io)i ;  and  yet  it 
is  to  prove  this  last  exclusiveli/  that  our  Lord,  who  couM 
not  have  reasoned  inaccurately  or  sophistically,  adibices  it.'.' 
He  paraphrases  therefore  the  Lord's  argument  thus  :-r- 

"  (iod  is  not  the  God  of  the  dead  [utterly  and  etoruiilly 
p(>ri.shed,  which  was  the  sense  iu  which  the  Sadducees  used  it, 
with  wliohl  He  was  disputing]  but  of  the  living. 

"  But  he  calls  himself  the  God  of  the  Patriarchs. 

•'  Therefore  those  still  live — ;or  will  live  again  [which  is  the 
jg  with  Him  to  whom  the  future  is  the  present,  and  who 
things  that  are  not,  bnt  shall  be,  as  though  they  already 


same  tlii 
culls  the 
were]. 


"  But  then,  as  already  intimated,  since  it  was  a  resurrniion  oar  ' 
Ldrd  undertook  to  establish,  which  He  establishes  only  by  jnov- 
ing  a  lift',  after  death,  tlie  life  which  >carries  with  it  a  pi'oof  <n' 
resurrection  must  either  be  itself  identical  therewith,  or  else  do- 
pendent  thereupon. "  .    . 

The  patriarchs  "  live"  then  in  the  purpose  o|^  God  as  to 
Ihem,  not  actually,  but  God  caljing  that  which  is  not   :i ; 

though  it  were — that  is  how  Mr.  Dobnoy  understands  it. 

]>ut  then,  when  God  says,  "I  am,  the  God  of  Abra.iain,' 
the  irvHcnt  actHally  is  everything/.     If  otherwise,  then  us 
■.  ^    ' ■•■      ■■.'.■.'■  ■'    ■■        ■ 

»       '■".'*.       ■-'■''■■:..'.'.'■■     ■   -  •  -    ■    ■  :■■.-■■ 


,7.     "^ 

X 

'f.r 


>*■ 


~\ 


220 


F.VcrS  AND  Tilt'OIUKS  AS  TO  A  FUTUKK  STATE. 


\, 


!J!lTr!^'^'!;r"'"'''^  '"  '''^"'^  «"'"'«<'ience,  no  less 
n.an  thof.,t,.ns<Ue  m.^ht  bo  AlM-.il.a.n's  (Jo.l  i„  that  .....so 
arm  ihi  rcMiim-ction  !,♦.  involvcl  at  all. 

i;...   il   is  no,   ,n..   ,|,a,,in  ,1..  u ay  Air.   Dolnu-y  .uHlor- 

staii.i.  it,  C.xl  euILs  the  tl.i„i..s  (hat  aro  not  as  though  thov 

wtM-o.     In  th..  passage  ho  i^uotvs,  (Jo.l  doos   h.doecl  si.oak 

,.  oMho  -many  nations  "of  which   Ho  haVl  n.a.ie  Abraham 

atho^v.th  <hvine  certainty,  as  being,  although  they  were 

notyef>.  But  He  does  not  speak  of  their  ;,/r..>,^  existence. 

t!  r    r;r/"?  '■'"'•     ^^  "^  ^^^"'^  not..ssert,"I«m' 
the  Go<l  ol  Abraham  "  as  a  matter  of  ^>resent  relationship 
^ui,en  none  o.v.stcl.     To  .say  so  is  to  speak  deceitjfully  fo/ 
HniL      .  I  a.n  the  Cio<l  of  41irahan.  "  to  human  ea.\{  nece.s. 
sanly  „.forrea  what   C4oa  >^  then  at  the  time  nXpoke 
Nor  was  there  here  prophecy  at  all ;  no  announcemene  of 
the  future;  nothmg  tha^  could  involve  the  thought  6f  the 
tuture      (,od  could  no  more  say  He  was  the  God  of  Abra- 
ham wlule  there  was  no  Abraham  to  be  God  to,  than  He  could 

'  T/J  ""  '■?':;;"^ ''"'  ^^'•^'  ^^  '•'''"''^"^l  y^^^^^  ^>«fo^e  ^^  resur. 
ect.on..    .    I  ho  Lord  which  Is.  and  which  was,  and  which  is 
l^^T^r    ";\'"=^"''-^^'^«  ''^'^^•''^"  the  ,,resent  and  the  future, 
H  hu-h  Mi.  Dobney  wouM  confo.md.     JJut  God  says,  "  I  wil 
be     a.s  well  a.s  •' I  am, '  a.id  in  this  distinguishes,  that  we 
•nay  u.iderstand  Hini ;  binding  Himself  to  Ihe  foL  of  hnl 
;-ms|>eech  which  Ho  adopts;  speaking  like  one  of  our- 
^ohcs  however  httle  He  bo  that,  in.stead  of  hiding  Himself 
lioni  us  i„  His  own  perfeetion.s.    '  o  ""useii 

-I  ..^  the  God  of  Abi-aham"  then  involved  the  tact  of 
Ab^im  s  ex.ste,i..o  whei.  He  spoke.     He  oouM  not  be  the 
^^od  of  o.ie  who  had  no  existence,  could  not  l,e  in  relatioii- 
-up   o  a  nonentity,  co..hl  not  be  (in  the  Sadducees'  thought 
.d  wiiut  the  dead  were)  '' the  God  of  the  dead."    -The  ^,-- 

(^' Mr    r't1f  ^r  '"  '"  "^'^  ""^'^^^^"^  partimplied 
(^3Ii.,  Constable  allows)  '^  the  restoration  of  the  body  to 

Deatiii  ,s  then  in  its  own  nattire  temporary.     As  the  de 
rang^ndit  of  God|ti^         of  man  in  his  cLior^  ^ 


>ti^ 


THE  PUOVIHIONAL  CllAKAi  TEK  OF  DEATH. 


221 


of  necessity  be  set  aside.  It  is  the  provisional  apjiendage 
of  a  scene  into  whi<;b  sin  has  entere<l,  but  where  (iod's 
iiKMcy  also  aboiindH.  In  its  nature  it  (Hiuld  not  l)e  Hnal. 
hi /act  it  is  to  be  done  nway. 

Death  does  uoteiiter  then  into  tliey/y««/ judgment-  That 
is  expressly  stated  to  bo  "  after  death.''  "It  is  appointed 
unto  men  ONCE  to  die,  but  aftku  this  the  Jm/f/nifinty  %, 
There  are  men  we  wot  of  who  say  it  is  appointed  u^ito  men 
nrice  t*o  die, — that  the  second  death  is  of  the  same  nature  as 
the  first, — and  that  death  thus  /.s  the  judgment.  Let  us  ex- 
amine carefully  tht'u  this  text  also.  °  ' 

There  is  otu'  frjiiitful  cause  of  misapprehension  of  it  on  all 
sides.  The  sentence  produced  is  not  understood  to  be,  what 
ii|yon  the  lace  of  it  it  is,  part  of  a  larger  sentence  in  which 
the  portion  of  the  saved  'm  (listin'/nis/h'J  frohi  fhe  i/fneral 
lot  of  men:  "  Xow  once  in  the  end,of  the  world  hath  He 
[Christ]  appeared,  to  put  away  sin»bv  the  sacrifice  of  Him- 
self An<l  AS  it  is  appointed  unto  men  once  to  die,  but  after 
this  the  judgment,  so  Christ  was  once  offered  to  bear  the 
sins  of  many;  and  unto  them  that  look  for  Ilim  shall  He  ap- 
pear the  second  time  without  sin  unto  salvation  '*  (Heb.  ix. 
26-2H).  :  ^-  ,  /.-.     ,,.■ 

There  is  a  manifest  contrast  here— a  designed  one.  The 
express  object  of  the  passage  is  to  display  the  etticacy  of  the 
work  of  Christ.  He  had  anj>eared  to  j)ut  away  sin  by  His 
sacrifice.  Sin  had  Ijrought  in  death,  had  created  a  neces- 
sity of  judgment.  How  then  did  Christ's  work  meet  those 
effects  of  sin  for  those  who  believed?  Were  death  and 
judgment  their  common  jmrtion  still?  Alas;  the  general 
answer  has  been  ui  the  afHnnative,  and  thus  the  meaning 
has  been  almost  taken  away  from  this  pregnant  and  wonder- 
ful statement.  Men  say  still,  with  the  woman  of  Tekoa  of 
old,  "  We  must  na^fh  die,"  and  as  for  judgment,  to  deny 
that  a  saint  shall  be  judged  Would  be  by  the  mass  considered 
heresy,  if  jt  were  iiot  lunacy.  Let  us  seek  to  get  ''full  as- 
surance  of  understanding"  as  to  this. 

First,  as  to  death,  is  it  a  "  must  needs  "that  the  believer 


f^; 


A'U. . 


<» 


cO 


<A 


. 


222        PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

die?    Did   Enoch  die?  did  Elijah?    Will  the  saints  that 
are  "alive  and   remain  un to, tU<e  coming   of  the   Lord"? 
"  We  shall  noi  all  sleep,"  says  the  apostle,  "  but  we  shall  all 
be  changed."     Thus  death,  with  the  apostle,  is  no  necessity 
for  the  believer.     We  may  die,  liot  innst.     We  may  meet 
it  as  the   provideiftial   dispeii|ation   of  an   infinitely   wise 
->§-^^^'~""^*.^^^'''^*^''  "^*  ^^  penalty,  nor  necessarily  even  as 
judgment,  in  that  sense  in  which  tlie  Father  jiulgeth  His  own 
children.*     It  is  '' to  depart  and  be  with  Christ,  which  is 
far  better,"— to  be  "absent  from  the  bqdy  and  liresent  with 
^     the  Lord."     Thus  has  Christ  "  abolished  deatli,  and  brought 
life  and  incorruption  to  light  by  the  gospel." 

This,  let  me  trust,  is  simple,  though  only  to  the  one  wlio 
refuses  the  unbelief  of  the  Sadducees  as.to  death.     If  it  be 
nonentity,  the  blotting  out  of  existence,  no  fair  words  about 
it  will  ever  make  it  other  than  it  is  confessedly  to  Mr.  Consta- 
ble.    But  we  have  not  now  to  do  with  him.     In  Scripture 
and  for  faith  (but  oh  how  little  alas,  faith  is  with  ns)  death 
is  no  more  the  portion  of  the  saint.     It  is  abolished.     And, 
if  alive  and  remaining  to  that  coming  of  the  Lord  for  wliich 
\WB  are  taught  daily  to  wait,  shall  never  even  "sleep"  at 
all.  ;  ^ 

And  notv  as  to  judgment  after  death.     The  plain  unequiv 
.   ocal  statement  of  our  Lord  has  been  obscured  to  us  by  an 
unhappy  translation;   but  there  is   no  question  as  to  the 
simple  fact,  that  in  John  v.  24-29  tKe  word  used  both  for 
"condemnation"  and  "  damnation  "  is  the  simple  word  for 
"ju(|gment."    Alford's  and  the  Bible  Union  revisions  both 
•  give  "he  that  heareth  ray  voice,  and  b<|}ieveth  on  llim  that 
sent  me,  hath  everlasting  life,  and  shall  not  come  into  Jad^j. 
m€?it";  and  again,  "  they  that  have  done  evil  unto  the  res- 
urrection of  Judf/metit.^' 

—The  common  thought  is,  "we  shall  have  to  come  into 
judgment,  but  we  hope  not  to  be  condemned^  The  Scrip- 
~^^^^^*^^^^L^L!^'i^i^^*^^^_^  best  came  into  judg- 
*  For  of  course  I  do  n(,t  spoak  of  sucli  caMvs  aTthi^o  of  ti.o  Corinth- 
mns.  or  of  a  "  sin  unfo  donfli." 


-^ 


THE  PUOVISION.VL  GHARACTEU  QF  DEATH. 


228 


ment,  we  could  not  but  be  condemned.     Hear  the  Psalmist 

express  it  when  as  a  servant  of  the  Lord  he  yet  pleads : 

,,*' Enter  Mo«  into  judgment  with  Thy  servant,  O  Lord ;  for 

■^ in  Thy  sight  shall  Ko  flesh   living  be  justified"  (Psa. 

cxiiii.  2). 

And  that  this  is  the  fact  Scripture  everywhere  beats  wit- 
ness. The  solemn  final  scene,  as  Rev.  xx.  pictures  ^t,  before 
the  great  white  throne,  we  shall  look  at  in  detail  at  a  future 
time.  But'  the  second  chapter  of  Romans  is  sufficiently 
plain  as  to  the  issue  of  judgment,  for  those  .who  come  into 
it.     Let  us  look  briefly  at  the  apostle'*  M'ords. 

Mark  then,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  "  the  day  when  God 
shall  judge  the  secrets  of  rrien  by  Jesus  Christ "  (ver.  16). 
The  principle,  too,  of  the  jtidgment  is  clearly  stated.  God 
"  will  render  to  every  man  according  to  his  deeds  ;  to  them* 
who  by  patient  continuance  in  well  doing  seek  for  glory  and 
honor  and  immortality  (incorruption)  eternal  life :  but  unto 
them  that  are  contentious,  and  do  not  obey  the  truth,  but 
obey;Unrighteousness,  indignation  and  wrath,  tribulation  and 
anguish,  upon  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil,  of  the  Jew 
first  and  also  of  the  Gentile;  but  glory,  honor  and  peace  to 
every  man  that  worketh  good,  to  the  Jew  first,  and  also 
to  the  Gentile  :  for  there  is  no  respect  of  persons  with  God.^* 

These  are  the  principles  of  judgment ;  what  is  the  actual 
result  ?  Who  of  all  the  sons  of  men  can  advance  his  claim 
to  eternal  life  upon  this  ground,  before  a  holy  and  heart- 
searching  God  ?     The  issue  is  this : — 

"For  as  many  as  have  sinned  without  law " — and  these 
are  the  least  guilty  and  the  least  responsible — "shall  also 
I'KRISH  without  law;  and  as  many  as  have  sinned  in  the  law 
shall  be  judgei)  hy  the  law."  Does  anyone  think  he  can 
escape,  when  judged  by  the  laAV  ?  The  apostle's  words 
elsewhere  exclude  absolutely  so  vain  a  hope.  "  For  as  many 
as,.are  of  the  works  of  the  law  are  under  the  curse;  for  it  is 
wi^itten,  Cursed  is  every  one  that  continueth  not  in  all  things 
written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them"  (Gal.  iii.  10). 
This  then  is  the  law's  judgment ;  and  this  the  patient  con- 


■/ 


224         FACrs  AM)  THKOHIKS  AS  TO  A  FL'TUJiE  STATK. 

tiniiance  in  well  doing  which  the  law  requires.  Judged 
then  hy  this  nUe,  who  can  escape?  Xot  one,  assuredly. 
As  it  is  written  again:  "  AVhatsoever  tlic  law  saith.  it  saith 
to  them  that  are  under  the  law:  that  every  moiith  may 
he  stopped,  and  all  TitE  wokli»  hecome  guilty  before 
God"  (Rom.  iii.  10).     : 

If  then  (4od  enters  into  judgment  witli  a  saint  and  servant 
of  His,o'.vn.  he  cannot  l)e  justihed.  The  ()ld  Testament 
and  the  Xew  unite  in  this  assurance.  And  (Tod's  way  of 
dehveran<*e  from  condemnation  is  hy  deliverance  from  the 
judgment  that  would  involve  it.  The  believer  does  not 
"  come  into  judgment "' :  the  ''  resurrection  of  judgment  "  is 
the  portion  of  the  wicked  alone. 

Let  any  one  consider,  Avith  the  fifteenth  eliapter  of  the 
first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  and  the  fourth  of  the  first  of 
Thessalonians,  betbre  his  eyes,  the  order  and  connection  of 
what  is  detailed  there,  and  he  will  see  how  clearly  and  sat- 
isfactorily Scripture  deals_  with  this  question.  When  •'  the 
Lord  Himself  sha-ll  <lescend  from  heaven  with  a  shout,"  not 
yet  visible  to  men,  as  we  shall  see  directly.  •'  first  the  dead  in 
Christ  shall  rise."  They  rise  -  in  power,''  "  in  incorruption," 
"in    ghu-y,"  ''in  the  image  of  the    Heavenly  ' 


,\ 


Himself     Could  there  be  a  question  of  trying  (bi-  tht^lAlife 
these   perfected    and   glorious   saints?      They   have    Keen 


-of  Christ 

already,  for  a  longer  hr  shorter   time,  every  one  of  them 
absent  from  the  body.  arKl  present  with  the  Lord*.     Can  it 

,  be  now  a  question  of  whether  they  had  title  to  the  Ijlessed 
place  they  havVbeen  in  ?  ^Assuredly  it  win  never  be  :  the 
case  has  been  abundantly  settled  l>efore  this.  '  And  can  it  be 
other  for  those  who,  remaining  alive,  without  dying  change 
their  mortality  for  immortality,  and  are  caught  uj)  with  the 

risen  saints  in  one  jgorious  company,  "to  meet  the  Lord-  in 

the  air,"  and  "  bcforever  with  the  Lord"  ? 

It  is  fffler  this  that  the  Lord  apjjcars  to  judgment,  for  we 

are  assured  that  "  when  Christ  (who  is  our  life)  shall  appear, 

then  shall  we  also  appear  with    Him  in  glory  "'  (Col.  iii.  3). 

And  not  tiir  after  this  is  there  judgment,  personal  judgment. 


■  i5?^^TT3,'^i:.Ts^r  ■ 


THE  PKOVISIONAL  CIl'vKACTEE   OF    DEATH. 


2-25 


<'  He  shall  judge  the  quick  and  the  dead  at  His  appearing 
and  His  kingdom.' 

Details  as?  to  the  judgment  wpl  come  afterwards.  It  is 
very  evident  there,  is  hero  no  putting  upon  trial  to  see  who 
they  are,  and  whether  worthy  or  nftt  to  enter  into  life. 
Christ's  call,  which  makes  no  mistake,  summons  forth  His 
saints  to  meet  Him.  Not  one  is  forgotten;  not  one  un^ 
known.  Blessed  be  His  name  !  it  could  not  be.  And  thus 
the  whole  matter  is  definitely  settled,  and  can  never  come 

up  again. 

That  we   should   give   account   of  ourselves  to  God,  is 
another  matter,  and  should  not  bo  confounded  with  this.     As 
a  question  of  reward,  we  shall  receive  for  the  deeds  done  in 
the  body,  and  "suffer  loss  "  or  find  gracious  recompense  ac- 
cordingly.    That  is  n^t  denied  but  affirmed.     But  we  are 
not  judged  according  to  our  works:  we  do  not  come  into 
judgment,  if  our  works  do.     There  is  a  very  manifest  dis- 
tinction between  these  things.  . 
.  >  Having  seen  then  the  Scripture  testimony  as  to  death  and 
judgment,  let  us  return  to  look  at  these  as  the  portiQn  of 
men,  from  which  Chnist's  work  delivers  His  own.     *'It  is 
appointed  uiAo  men  once  to  die,  but  after  this  the  judg- 
ment."    For  the  saint  on  the  other  hand,  "  Christ  was  once 
offered,  to  bear  the  sins  of  many,  and  unto  them  that  look 
for  Him  shall  He  appear  without  sin,"— or  rather  "apart 
from   sin,''  as   having   no  more    to    settle   that   question — 
"  apart  from  sin  unto  salvation."  ' 

''Once  death,"  then,  arid  '' aj'ter  this,  judgment "  is  the 
lot  of  the  unsaved.  How  clear  this  makes  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  two  !  Death  temporary  and  to  ijive  place  to  judg- 
ment, which  is  not  in  death  but  afterwards.  Thus  Scripture. 
How  feeble  then  again  .all  Mr.  Constable's  arguments  as  to 
the  primarj*ense  of  words,  and  that  death  and  nothing  but^ 
death  in  its  primary  sense  is  the  final  judgment!      '" 


Twice 


death,  in  effect,  is  his  argument :  once  before,  and  then  again 
in  the  judgment.  ,  Once  death,  says  Scripture,  but  after  this 
the  judgment.  '''^That  judgment  is  indeed  the  second  death. 


220 


FACT8  A>fD  THKOKIKS  AS  TO  A  FmuUE  STATE. 


?  death  m  ,vh.ch  they  ,vl,o  suffer  it  al,o  never  1?    H  J 
vam  to  dispute  the  unspeakably  solemu  factT  '      "^ 


.     •  CHAPTER  xxni. 

. ,  ^        .  .  -  .    .    •      ■  -  ■.-.•■■■- 

7  :       -  THE  JTlXISTUr  OP  DEATH 

If  death  has  then  the  place  which  we  have  seen  it  ha«  it 

aeatd    ,  naj.itis  rather    ust  what  wc  shnnl.l  i..  • 

,to  «pect,  that  Go,l  woul.i' take  up ^^^01  of  it  a    , 'TT 

condemnation  of  »a„  ,W,ieh  it  i^Z^^^-^^ 

upon  the  hearts  and  consciences  of  men  ,,  1       T  ™ 

g«i«ve.ay.    W.shou.d  cx;:trn,"    r/ootrtrat 

Thfl™r:f7he;:;^\i:L^^'T;''''  -^-^e  nas.done.    ' 

is  that  it  was  a  " atL^^ii^So?:^^,!,:""™;""''-/" -- 
of  condemnation.'.'  ,  «'  aeatli,  —a     ramisfration 

tla^htVa'lctri'sfr  Z''  •V'""™'->-.''P-tua. 

and  therefore  ZZ  Xu    tteZt  a  r'"''  '"'T"'    ' 
leardt,  of  the  very  rrreatP  f  voV         t  '  'esson,  when  . 

of  the  inade^uaey^ir;::.!  ™^^,^;>^  a  .a.^^^^^ 

:^  t:rstaEiS""'""%" » — "  -^^"^ 

that  the  death  it  sneik,  or    "  n  \  T"  '™  "'"'«■•«••""' 

die  "-is  notthe  ^  !!l^.".^    !'"•  "'"'  ^''^^^inneth  ■?  shall 


^ 


^c^tMnr.voa}ed.econd  death,  but  "aeath 


THE    MINISTRY   OF    DEAltL. 


227* 


of  the 
secornl 
dies*'? 

,How 


bas,  it 
>n  of. 
eason 

>fthe    . 
home 
t  and 
,  that    ; 
tself,  • 
>e  ^n    .^ 


-\. 


in  its  ordinary  Heuse.  Thi«  once  established  Batisfactonly. 
wc  shall  find  the  Old  Testament  in  a  now  Ught,  and  the 
perieet  Helf-consiste.u^-  of  tr.uh   everywhere  m  its  utter- 

*°  And  thi;  will  be  established,  as  soon  it  is  seen,  what  should 
be  manifest  as  to  the  holy  law  of  the  unchang.'able  God,     ^ 
-that  the  obedience  it  required  was  absolute,  perfect  obedi- 
ence,  and  nothing  short.     This  the  Nej  Testament,  no  les. 
than  the  Old,  abundantly  declares.     We  have  already  had 
the  apostle's  statement  as  to  this,  which  shows,  that;  Chris- 
tianity itself  also  ha<l  not  modified  the  law's  reqmren^nts. 
It  is  the  <teat  apostle  of  the  Gentiles,  the  man  who,  if  any 
did,  upde'i-stood  God'^  grace  in  the  gospel,  who  assures^us 
that  "as  many  as  are  ol' the  works  of  the  law  are  under  the    , 
curse-  for  it  is  written.  Cursed  is  every  one  that  contmueth    . 
not  in  aU  things  that  are  written  in  the  book  of  .'the  law'  to 
do  them  "  (Gal.  iii.  10).     It  is  again  the  apostle  who  is  con- 
sidered by  many  (however  improperly)  the  apostle  ot  law, 
who  unites  with  Paul  in  this  testimony,  that  "whosoever 
shall  keep  the  whole  law,  and  yet  offend  in  one  pomt,  he  is 
guilty  of  all"  (James  ii.  10).     Unswerving,  pertect  obedi- 
ence was  therefore*  that  required  by  the  law.  . 

To  this,  however,  may  be  thought  opposed ^e  whole  sys- 
tem of  appointed  sacrifices  and  the  forgiveness  that  m  this 
'  way  the  very  law   itself  proclaimed.     But   the   objection 
'  would  apply  in  that  case  to  the  apostles'  teaching,  who  cer. 
tainly  were  not  ignorant  of  so  plain  a  fact.     We  must  take 
it  up,  however,  a  little  particularly,  and  try  to  show  the 
■    consistency  of  these  two  things. 

There  were,' as  all  wiH  easily  remember,  tioo  givmgs  ot 
the  law.  The  first  time  (which  we  shall  find  as  history  in 
Aodus  xix.-xxiv.)  it  wasp»/-6  law,-  with  no  whispered ^ord 
even  of  mfercy,— no  provision  for  failure  or  for  sin.  -  Moses 
-i  then  called  up  into  the  Mount  to  receive  from  God's 
'  hand  the  tables  of  stone  "  written  with  the  finger  of  God." 
There,  in  the   Mount,  he  does  indeed  se-e  the  pattern  of 


other  and  of  hsavi^ly  things,  ft»r  God  would  show  us  that 


'■•  ^ 


:f. 


228 


PACTS  AN^D  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


,^ 


merijy  is  already  in  His  heart,  as  it  surely  is.     But  na  wofd 
of  this  is  yet  npokoii  to  t;he  people,  and  as  actual  institution 
fiiids  no  i»laco  till  the  aovonant  of  tlie  law  as  first  given  is 
transjrio.ssed  and  set  aside.     As  far  as  the  people  is  con- 
.     cerned,  it  is  all  as  yet  law  pure  and  simple.     Under  this      , 
they  fail  utterly,  turning  their  deliverer-God,  "  their  glory,  "  ~ 
into  the  similitude  ot  an  ox  that  eateth  grass.'    The  tables 
of  the  covenant  are  broken^  judgment  is  executed  on  the 
guilty  pe6ple ;  and  all,  on  this  ground,  is  over  forever  (ch.    ' 
xxxii.).      j^\::.^.  _  :,      [■_     ;.-■     ..■■■_  j  ..:._•■'.■■:■/  /   '. '^'^  .      :    ■■■ 

But  the  blessed  God  has  still  resources  in  Himself,  and 
again  He  takes  up  the  peoj)le.     Again  the  law  is  given,  word 
for  word  the  §ame,  and  not  ajo^  abated;  for  the  hqiiness    ' 
of  God's  nature  can  know, no  change.     But  there 'is  this      • 
difference,  and  it  is  characteristic:  it  is  now  witten  hij  the    '  , 
hand  of  th^  mediator  (xxxiy.  28),  and  not  l)y  God  Hinlself. 
The  law- is  in  the  hands  of  the  mediator,  and  nox^  mc  hear 
the  new  glad  tones  oflong-sufferilig  goodness  apd  mercy.- 

Jehovah  declares  Himself  as   He  did  not  before.     His_/ 
glory  shines  out  as  not  yet  it  had.     He  is  "the  L6rd,  the 
Lord  God,  merciful  and  gracious,  long-suffering  and  abun^ 
dant  in  goodness  and  truth,  keeping  mercy  for  thousands, 
forgiving  iniguity  and  transgression  and  sin."      This  is  new 
ground;  and  yet,  not  altogether  new,  nor  grace  unmixed. 
He  is  still  the  I^awgiver,  still  in  a  covenant  of  works  w4th 
His  people :— "  and  that  will  by  no  means  clear  the  fjuilty:'  ' 
This  is  the  new  basis  upon  which  everything  is  now  to  rest.       i 
It  Is  law,  but  it  is  not  pure  law.     It  is  law  in  a  mediator's 
hand,  ministered  in  mercy,  yet  not  lessening  its  requirement : 
ai>  appai'ent   contradiction,   and   in   reality  two  principles 
united  which  cannot  unite  reallyin  the  justification  of  man. 
God  says  so :  He  cannot  dear^cmhot  justify ;  and  it  is  of 
tfie  law  thus  given,.the  second  time  and,  not  the  firgt,  that 
the  apostle  speaks  when  he  calls  the  law  "written  and  en. 
graven  in  stones,"  "  the   ministration  of  death"  and  "the 


-mmistfatioD  of  condemnation "  (2  Cor.  iii.  7,9).    it  is  of 
this  law  in  .the  hand  of  the  mediator,  that  he  says  again. 


THE  UINISTRTt  OF   DEATH.' 


229 


.A«  martya-  are  of  tte  works  of  the  law  are  under  the 

T/we  look  utfhe  scene  ae»cril.ea.i„  tl.e  book  of  ExoUus 
-  T'^^iv  )  we  shultWuJ  tlml  (io,l  really  gave  w.tne^s  at 
<"""  '  v™!  Hrive  ir^f  its  trufe  character,  although  n, 
,he  very  t.me^He  g»> «";«'_  eharacteristic  of  pid  Tes- 

rer:lS„%rhen  Mo,e.  the  r,^;J^^^ 

■^.  Tesmnent  (lispensauofi,-    ^"^^^  ^^;^\  ^11.!  He  said, 

fm-  there  shall  po  man  see  me,  and,  live.     An  , 

The^tat  ace  V  me,  and  thou  Shalt  stand  «P-;;-^   * 

„7  U  sha  1  come  to  pas^  while  my  glory  passethhy,  that 
and  It  shall  comi,        i      i     _  j.  ^,^(,g  ^.,ti, 

I  will  put  thee  m  a  c  eft  .<f  the  rock,  a  ^^ 

•      't:Uhr::tthe>sttUneofthegi™^^^^^^ 

-: ^i-rr;rwS^^e.e^- 

human  eyes^notyetahetobehom^^^^^^ 
;^rs'ra^^"ra:'C— .rof  t..t  d.^^^^^^^^^^^ 

-^^;;;:t-Sdr^=c^<'T-y,u 

watir^vell  hefore  the  holiest  deel.r^  t^  w^ - 
the  holiest  was  not  ^^V"*"    .       ,1  hrvtnhmed,  came 


4f 


230 


PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


*  mail  turneth  from  his  wickedness,  and  doeth  that  which  is 
hiwful  and  riglit,  lie  sJiall  save  his  soul  alive"  (Ezck.  xviii. 
27).  Hut  who  ever  did  what  was  lawful,  as  measured  by  a 
law,  to  break  one  qomniandnient  of  which  was  to  be  "  guilty 
of  all"  y  Who  ever  broke  off  his  sins  so  as  to  be  fit  for 
the  presence  of  a  "  holy,  holy^  holy  "  God  ?  Never  one : 
not  one.  "There  is  none  righteous,  no,  not  one"  wa^  the 
law's  verdict;  "  there  is  none  that  doeth  good,  no,  not  one." 
And  the  veil  hung  before  God's  presence  unlifted,  save  as 
once  a  year  the  typical  l>lood  was  put  upon  the  mercy-seat ; 
and  then  it  dropped  again,  impenetrable  as  ever,  for '•  the 
blood  of  bulls  and  goats  could  not  take  away  sin." 

Thus,  through  all  the  old  economy:  until  one  day,  marked 
out  from  other  days  by  a  darkness  such  as  never  was;     And 

'  when  that  passed,  the  darkness  in  which  God  dwelt  had 
also  passed.  "The  veir  of  the  temple  was  rent  in  the 
midst."  . 

God  was  no  more  "in  the,  darkness  "  ;  He  was  "  in  the 
light "  (1  Kings  viii.  12;  1  John  i.  7).  i 

The  way  into  God's  presence  was  no  more  barred  up : 
Christ  was  "  the  Way  "  (John  xiv.  6). 

And  instead  of,  as  heretofore,  One  who  could  not 'clear 
the  guilty,  there  was  revealed  the  glory  of  divine  grace, 
juHtifi/iufj  the  uiujodly  {Uom.'w.b),  '     ' 

One  would  gladly  enlarge  upon  this  unspeakable  loving- 
kindness  ;— would  gladly  apply  this  healing  assurance  to  any 
soul  conscious  of  the  double  character  of  evil  attaching  to' 
man.  He  is  "  ungodly  " ;  true,  but  he  is  more,  much  more, 
than  that :  he  is  "  without  strength  "  also.  Christ  died  for 
him  as  having  that  character  (Rom.  v.  6).  As  having  it,  he 
is  welcome  at  once  to  the  blood  which  cleanses  from  sin, 
and  the  grace  which  strengthens  and  enables  for  holiness.' 
But  our  subject  is  now  the  character  of  the  law  rather:  let 
us  turn  back  to  consider  what  this  involves  as  to  the  Old 
Testament. 

*■       .  ■ 

God  was,  then,  by  a  dispensation  of  law,  shuttin^^ 


man  up 


to  mercy.     He  was  running  the  plough-share  into  the  soil 


i- 


» 


Tllli   MINISTHY  O^"^  DEATH. 


2ai 


up: 


'     l^U  a  (or  the  seed  of  the  I'ospel.     He  was  not  o}/  if 

Snont  constantly  asserts  thl8>8  the  obj«et  of  the  law^ 
The  apostle  speaks  of  it  as  ^hat  all  Christians  were  wdl 
Ivarc  of  • ;'  We  km>w  thaS  what  things  soevev  the  law  sa.th, 
tt  'Ih  to  them  thnt  are\.ndc.  the  law, //«<  e^u;  ,.ou,k 

,^:\.  ....M  ana  all  the  woH.l  ^'-o-  ,?"    r^^  "^ 
rnl"    '.  Uv  the  law.i8  the  knowledge  of  sin.         1  he  law 

ILtl.  wrath "     "The  law  entered  thaMhe offence  mis;ht 
rhtn.?-"iahcre  had  heenalaw  givenWK.ehco,.l,l  have 

1  riife,  verilv  righteousness  should-have  been  '-y  Jh"  »«;; 
Rnrthe  Scrii.nrc  hath  conel.ided  (shut  up  together)  all 
^der  sin  .  r  the.promise  l-V  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  m.ght 
be  given  to  thetn  that  believe."    I  need  not  quote  more 

,    '*' But'l'ow,  if  such  was  the  scope  and  oHicct  of  the  la.v  -^f 
God  by  it  was  seeking  to  produce  conv.ol.on  ot  a  smfnl  and 
helpless  condition,  and  t«  cast  men  thus  upon  H.s  mcrcy^- 
S  simple  that  lie  shouhV  take  up  in  it  the  -  «"<".™'"2 
oHhat  death  which  had  enterea  in  by  sm,  ai,d  wh.ch  was 
constantly  appealing  to  man  in  every  possible  way -the 
brod  seal  o.' 'condemnation-wide  as  humanity-upon  the 
-    fallen  creature!     How  irresistible  the  c.,nvMc  ,o,,  of  what 
man  was,  and  where  he  "was,  in  the  eye  of  a  holy  God,  ,f  H^ 
2"  Id  cime  in  and  say  to  him,  meaning  just  what  ,t  would    . 
rneanwhen  heard  in  connection  with  the  first  threatening  of 
ritr  literally  carried  out,  "  the  man  that  doeth  these 
thi^B  shall  /.<.•-■  in  them,"  "the  soul  that  sinneth^t  shall 

'''The  strangeness  of  this  interpretation  to  m>rrS  just  its 
perfect  consistency  with  the  whole  design  »<1  •»-"2'  "^^ 
the  law.  If  no  one  under  it  ever  escaped  death  Ov.th  one 
exception  evidently  on  at^l.or  g.o.,nd)  people  thmk  .t  im. 
possL  that  death  on. ;?^ai,.ry.^ 


meant. They 


forget  thiit  no  one  cvor  aM  falfil  ltKtl;at  thieve 


»:*• 


was,,.,.,  righteous,  no, not  evenone.     How; couid  they  th^ 
escape  it  ?    And  if  God  in  the  law  were  not  jadgmg  tor  eter- 


232    ..   FACTS  AND  THEOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

.  nity,  but  as  a  present  thing,  to  cast  men  in  the  conviction  of 
their  lost  condition  upon  His  mercy,  how  consistent  with 
this  plan  that  He  should  make  the  judgment  ui»on  that  con- 
dition a  thing  a[)j)areiit  to  every  one  under  it,  instead  of 
^omething  yet  unseen,  and  which  eternity  alone  should  too 
late  reveal !  . 

Had  God  said,  as  we  have  made  Him  i^ay,  "  the  soul  that 
sinneth  shall  die  the  second  death,^'  they  might   have  com- 
forted themselves  with  the  assurance  that  no  one  could  know 
much  about  that,  and  written  placid  lies  upon  the  grave- 
stones, an<:l  lost  the  whole  reality  of  the  ruin  they  were  in. 
Doubtless  many  (lid  do  so  in  spite  of  all,  for  light  never  yet 
opened  eyes  closed  to  it,  but'  still  Go<l  had  bome  witness, , 
none  the  less,  if  they  rejected  it  as  men  still  reject,  that  they 
were  fallen  creatiires,  and  tcho  had  confirmed  by  their  otra 
act  and  deed  the  original  sentepce  under  which  they  lay. 
Every  white  hair  in  a  man's  head,  every  wrinkle  in  his  brow, 
was  thus  God's  witness  in  a  double  way,  a  solemn  aj)peal 
which  one  would  thint  irresistible.     Death  was  not  that  for 
which  man  was  cheated ;  no,  it  was  God  "  turning  man  to 
destruction."'     "Thou  hast  set  our  iniquities  before  Thee, 
our  secret  sins  in  the  light  of  Thy  countenance.     For  all 
our  days  are  passed  away  in  Thy  wrath ;  we  spend  our  years 
as  a  tale  that  is  told.f  .  .  So  teach  us  to  number  our  days, 
that  we  may  apply  our  hearts  unto  wisdom"   (Psa.  xc.    8 
9,12).     'i"    .■  .;■  :    -    '   -     ^, 

But  not  only  in  this  way  was  man's  lost  corfdition  mani- 
fest, but  the  judgment  of  the  law  still  left  God  free  to  the 
grace  which  was  under  the  veil,  while  yet  the  veil  was  not 
removed.  Had  God  said,  "  The  soul  that  sinneth,  it  shall 
die  the  second  death,''  none  could  contc?st  with  Him  the 
justice  of  that  sentence;  butr^surely  it  would  seem  to  bind_^ 
Him  to  eternal  judgment,  to  universal  justice,  but  divorced 
from  grace.  As  it  was  Hxi  «lid  not  bind  Himself  so  that  to 
the  broken  and  contrite  He'could  not  show  mercy,  outside — 
of  law  and  its  penalty  altogether.  It  could  do  its  work  as 
convicting  man  of  sin,  and  on  the  ground  of  human  effort  and 


■f    ':• 


THE  MIKISTUY   OF   DEATIt. 


•23H 


f 


'^'  "  .   ,  ^.o  uhiit  him  ui»  in  condemnation,  bring 

rn  .::^:r::sC^.-,  yit  leave  Hm  in  u,.t  woH| 

"'"  ;  1  r  '^vcinto  which  lh«  full  li;^ht  yel  l>a,i ......  u,.,l 

|,„y„  .a  th.  S'^^ '"  ,„„J^^ia„l„l  [.■  .M.uM  be  free  to  exer- 
„„uld  not  co,ne,  to  a  "'"^J  *'"|  ^  <,o„,,i  ;„  ^Uort 

,.!8c  where  man's  liopc  was  in  Uis  mercy,     i- 
He  nlv  l.an,l.,  aB  to  all  working  out  of  clam,  upon  God. 
U  co^d  not  tie  Rod's  hand,  a,  to  mercy  shown  to  man. 

Is  to  th"  '•"«»  "'"^'f'  *"*  ""^  '"^^ ''""'  realy  speak  of  the        , 
tweenWsa   lnngwh^^^.,when  ^^^^  ^^^^^^  and  mother      - 

.Jw.  hpart  of  the  ten  comnuinAinents.     And  in  ueiu.  , 

tlie  nean  oi  luv.  i^^*  i^.w.r*  thcso  verv  com- 

"Tet'^rone  who  doubts  rca,!  ph  and  on  through  the 

en  ;     Sat^lch,  if  he  will,  and  let  him  ^^^^^^ 

.enalty  pronounced,  ^^J^^  ^XTt   t^e  It  aU. 

ar^s  rt;:!  tuit  :fr  i,  ..jArea-^^^ 

•      «;.«  tn  apstruction  cast  its  shadow  </ver  the  state 

\  on      .         ^      ^  the  whole  scene,  and  what  is  the/ 

tUs?ofTl\t"whLhtheLordofglor  "  Ohris|    ; 

/  r    lll^d  I  from  the  curse  of  the  law,  bemg  niade  i 
^.ath  redeemed  "^ J""^^  ^J^^  ^°^         ;„  „,,      „„,  ,iat  /m». 


r^^: 


234         PAl'TS  AND  TIIi:0IUE8  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

expression  surely  of  the  curHo,  uihI  not  the  whole  thing;  and 
HO,  as  I  h:iv(!  urged,  is  deuth.  This  is  death  in  its  most 
><hainot\il  form ;  but  it  is  not  the  second  dt-ath,  nor  doe8  the 
\&\v  speak  of  that. 

Mr.  Constable  has  endeavored"  to  show  that  the  Old  Tes- 
tament announces  death  as  the  ])unishment  of  the  wicked  in 
the  future   state.     It  is   not  to  bo  supposed  that  he  has 
"brought  forward  the  worst  pass.ages  to  j)rovo  this  position. 
Let  us  then  see  what  he  produces.     He  says  :— - 

.'*  There  [in  the  Old  TostuuiontJ  tJioword  mubt  lie  taken  in  the 
sense  God  has  stiunijed  ni)ou  it,  nud  left  unchanged.  It  is  there 
over  ftud  over  agiiiu  described  us  the  end,  in  tiie  future  age,  of 
obstinate  trans^jressors.  For  such  God  declares  Ho  has  *  \iYO- 
viiled  iho  itis/rttments  o/ileiilh\-  of  such  as  Imto  divine  Wisdom 
tliiit  "NVisdoni  says,  '  they  that  hate  xao  lore  death  '  ,•  to  the  wicked 
God  saith,  'thou  shalt  surely  die,'  '  the  soul  that  sinneth  it  shall 
'die.'"  ;/  ^^,  ...     ..-- ^-  ,.    ^ 

He  adds:  .„  ,. 

"Xo  ()ne,  wo  suppose,  will  app^  the  death  pronounc'od  in 
the  above  passages  uiiou  unrei)ented  and  unpardoned  sin  to 
that  death  \vhieh  all  men  alike,  whether  saved  or  lost,  undergo 
as  children  of  Adam.  They  can  only  apply  it  to  future  2>unish- 
ment.  ,  Death,  then,  is,  according  to  the  Old  Testament,  to  be 
after  judgment  the  result  of  sin,  as  life  is  the  result  of  righteous- 
uess."  ".  '  1 

I  havt!  shown  how  directly  this  doctrine  is  opposed  to 
Scripture.  Death  after  judgment  is  Mr.  Constable's  version ; 
"after  death  tlie  judgment"  is  that  of  Scripture.  And  of 
course  all  he  says  upon  this  is  his  own  conjecture.  What 
pf0of  has  he  that  this  death  is  aff«'r  judgment  ?  None. 
What  proof  that  it  is  in  the  future  state?  None  really. 
He  has  only  a  \4ry  weak  argument  that  all  men  alik*?,  saved 
or  lost,  undergo  the  first  death  But  does  he  mean  to  say 
tnai  it  iiever  comes  upon  inen  tlierefore  as  direct  Judgment  "tt 
lor  Bin  ?     If  so,  he  is  at  direct  issue  with  fact  and  Scripture 

aiiKe. .  , 

What  would  he  say,  for  instance,  to  these  statements  of 
Klihu  ?    '•  He  shall   break   in  pieces  mighty  men  without 


THE  MINISTRY   OF  DEATH. 


285 


;  and 

most 

J8  the 

I  Tes- 
ted in 
c  has 
liliou. 

in  tho 
there 
3c,  of 
'  pro- 
istlom 
riekeil 
ishaU 


ud  in 
tin  to 
(l'>rgo 
inish- 
to  be 
teous- 

;d  to 

sioh ; 
id  of 
-Vhaf 
rone. 
\ally. 
aved 
)  say 
tnent 
)ture 


number,  and  set  other,  in  their  stead.  Therefore  Re  know- 
cth  thpir  works,  and  Ho  overtumeth  them  m  tho  night,  bo 
that  they  are  destroyed.  Ho  striketh  them  as  wicked  men 
in  the  open  sight  of  others,  because  they  turned  back  from 
Him,  an.l  would  not  consider  any  of  His  ways  (Job 
xxxiv. -24-27) 

Or  ac^ain-   "And  if  they  be  bound   in   fetters,  and  be 
holdcn  In  cords  of  affliction  ;  then  He  sheweth  them  then- 
work,  and  their  transgressions   that  they  have   exceeded 
He  openeth  also  their  ear  to  discipline,  and  commandeth  that 
they  return  from  iniquity.     If  they  obey  and   serve  Hira 
they  shall  spend  their  days  in  prosperity  and  their  years  in 
pleasures;   but  if  thoy.abey  not,  they  shall  perish  by  the 
sword,  and  fhev  8h#    die    without  knowledge.     But  the 
],vpocrite8  in  heart  heap  up  wrath;  they  cry  not  when  He 
bindoth  them :  they  .lie  in  youth,  and  their  life  is  among 
the  unclean  "(xxxvi.  8-U|  comp.  also  xxxui.  1^-30). 

This  is  indeed  the  great  lesson  of  all  this  part  ol  Job. 
The  thorough  and  complete  exemplification  of  the  principle 
we  shall  shortly  have  occasion  to  consider,  in  that  great  day, 
the  dav  of  the  Lord  upon  the  earth,  when  it  shall  be  cleared 
bv  iudgment  that  the  meek  may  inherit  it  (Psa.  xxxvii). 
Of  this  the  Old  Testament  is  full,  and  the  principle  is,  as  we 
have  seen,  the  principle  of  the  law  ;  to  substitute  for  it  the 
New  Testament  complete  revelation  is  to  lose  the  under- 
"^    standing  of  the  old  dispensation.  _ 

*.  "strange  as  it  may  Skm,  and  inconsistent  too  with  tne 
known  belief  of  the  .Tews  before  our  Lord's  time,  there  is 
not  really  one  passage  in  the  Old  Testament  in  which  either 
heaven  is  spoken  of  as  the  abode  of  the  righteous,  or  hell  (m 
our  present  sense  of  it)  as  the  abode  of.the  lost.  The  word 
«  hell  "  is  always  in  it  that  word  "  sheol' V ^f hich  w^f  have 
already  looked  at,  and  which  is  the  equivalent  ofihades, 
"  the  unseen,"  and  applied  always  and  only  to|hede^th  state. 


rf'. 


•/ 


This  abundantly  confirms  the  belief  that  the :^degththreat- 
ened,  even  to  impenitcmce  and  unbelief,  was  d^at^  m  our  or- 
dinary understanding  of  it,  but  death  as  tl^c  judgment  ot  C^od^ 


Ls  of 
hout 


.    • 


/y 


J236         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTfJRE  STATE. 


'%\ 


and  throwing  its  awful  shadow  over  the  eternity  beyond,  ys 
With  this  Mr.  Constable's  texts  completely  harmonize.     Nor 
does  he  indeed  attempt  to  show  that  the  death  they  speak  of 
is  judgmenr  in  a  future  state.    It  would  be  impossible  for  him 
to  prove  this,  for  it  is  not  true.  f 

The  legal  , dispensation  was  intended  as  a  means  of  reach- 
ing on  a  broa<l  scale  (and  with  a  still  broader  after-purpose) 
the  consciences  of  men.     It  was  part  of  a  method  of  grace 
to   prepare  for  the    coming  Christ  by  icon victing  men    of 
guilt   and  of  helplessness,  shutting  them  up  to  the  grace 
;  ',  which  was  then  to  be  revealed.     And  thus  it  was  that  there 
was  a  "  due  time '' for  Christ  to  come,  as  the  apostle  de- 
-l  rlarefe;  and  that  when  this  purpose  of  the  law  should  be  ac- 
complished.    Thus  ''  when  we  were  yet  without  strength  in. 
'hie  time  Christ  died  for  the  ungodly"  (Rom.»  v.  6).     In  the 
meanwhile    for   individual  .lieed   was   provided    a  way    of 
cleansing  and  forgiveness  (typical  largely,  of  necessity)  in 
which  broken  and  contrite  souls  found  hope  of  mercy.     But 
the  system  was.  as  a  whole,  a  ministration  of  death  an'd 
-condemnation.  v 

And  for  this  purpo.se  the  death  which  was  the  broad  seal  of 
condemnation  upon  universal  man  was  taken  up  and  used  in 
the  penal  code  of  the  divine  government  in  Israel :  man  thus 
having  under  his  eyes  a  temporal  retribution  which  would 
witness  to  the  most  carnal  (rod's  wrath  upon  sin,  and  his  own 
condition  as  a  sinner  under  it. 

But  that  was  not  all  the  light  shed  upon  the  future,  and 
"^      we  must  look  at  what  vet   remains  in  some  little  detail: 
•       first,  the  prophetic  landscape  of  the  Old  Testament,  which, 
is  important  many  .ways  with  regard  to  our  present  subject, 
- — -and  then  the  meaning  and  character  of  its  typical  teaching. 


k 


I 


PURIFICATION  AND  BLESSING  OF  THE  BABTH. 


237 


CHAPTER  XXIV..  : 

XHEPUHIFICATION  AND  BLESSING  or  TEE  EABTH.  .; 

«.pk  to  arrive  at  some  definite  conclusion  as 

tered  through  Its  pages.  ,m„  ,„fl  extends  neither  to 

First  then,  the  horizon  " .  «»^t''!>':;"*  ^^  ,o«ls  of  the 

heaven  nor  to  hell.    It  .s  '-"S"--   *f^  I'J,,  ,  ,,„d  . 
departed  <*ist  indeed  »  *- ^^^'.^^Vt^^  ^^ 

of  darlcness  unexplored  andlrt^^    ^e  a  resurrection,  and  the 
is  recogn.7ied,  too,  that  there  wi  ^^^^^  ^^ 

consider  these  hey^aft*^---     J^'  o,j  Testament  range. 

A  text  or  t^o  here  w.l  gne  us  the^^  ^         ^^^ 

First,  f  »y;«„P:;Xt Te  .Tihls  He  giCen  to  th. 
heavens,  kve  the  Lord  s ,  but  rtateraent 

children  °' ^^  .^''I.J,'' Jt  I  ™.ter  of  fact,  Enoch 

■  rroTLtLtheLor^l  had  taken  him;  and  Elijah,  too, 

had  not  died,  but  tne  i.  heaven.     But  there  is 

had  gone  up  ^^^  ^"'^^^^^J^.^l^.er^n'.A.elii.i. 

no  statement  anywhere  *•>»*■  ""^^^ ^°  ''    „.  .„  „  the  righteous 

;     ,,  «.Z  dwells  the^^^^^^^^^^^^^  (,^^ 

(cxxxii.  13,  14).  u  For  evil-doerfe' shall 


"T, 


/f/ 


n 


,»ijjiii^ 


FACES  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUmRE  STATE. 


238 


not  be;  yea,  thou  shalt  diligently  consid^  his  place,  and  it 
shall  not  be.  But  the  meek  shall  inherit  the  earth,  and  de- 
light themselves  in  the  abundance  of  peace"  (Psa.  xxxvii. 
9—11). 

Again:  "The   righteous    shall   be  ^recompensed   in  The 
earth;    much   more   the   wicked   and   the   sinner "  (Prov 
xl  31). 

This  is  the  univepal  strain.'  .The  God  of  judgment  is 

going  by  judgment  to  purify  the  earth,  and  make  it  the 

abode  of  righteousness  apd  peace.     Transgressors  hre  to 

'be  rooted  out  of  it.     The  whole  earth,  is  to  be  full  of  the 

•  glory  of  the  Lord  .as  the  waters  cover  the  sea. 

These  are  the"  promises.     But  whose  ?     Mark  well,  there 
is  riot  one  word  yet  of  the  l^^ither's  house  or  of  the  heavenly 
places.     The  inheritance  is  of  earth  only.     The  pros}pect  is 
what  we  are  accustomed  to  call  millennial.     Whose   then 
.  are  these  Old  Testament  promises  ?    If  I  take  the  Old  Tes^  i 
tament  Itself,  they  are  Israel's.     ''Israel  shall  bud  and  blos- 
som, and  fill  the  face  of  the  earth  with  fruit."     "  But  in  the 
last  days  it  shall  come  to  pass,  that  the  mountain  of  the  house 
of  the  Lord  shall  be  established  in  the  top  ^f  the  mountains, 
and  it  shall  be  exalted  abova  the  hills,  and  people  shall  flow 
unto  it.    And  many  nations  shall  come  and  say.  Come,  and  let 
us  go  lip  unto  the  mountain  of  the  Lord,  and  to  the  house 
of  the  God  of  Jacob;  and  He  will  teach  us  of  His  ways,  and 
we  will  walk  in  His  patKs;  for  the  law  shall  go  forth  of 
•^ZwMi,  and  the  word  of  the  Lord  ffom  Jerusalem.     And  He 
shall  judge  among  many  people,  and  rebuke  strong  nations 
afar  off;  and  they  shall  beat  their  swords  into  plow-shares, 
and  their  spears  i;>tff  pruning-hooks  :  nation  shall  not  lift  up 
sword  against  nation,  neither  shall  they  learn  w^r  any  more. 
But  they  shall  sit  every  man  under  his  vine,  and  under  his 
fig  ^e;  and  none  shall  make  them  afraid:  for  the  mQiith 
of  Qie  Lord  /)f  hosts  hath  spoken  it "  (Tun.  xxvii.  6 ;  Mic. 
iv.  1-4). 

Thus  sealed,  withs^tehovah^s  seal  is  Isra^'s  claim  to  the 
Old  Testament  promises.     If  still  we  doubt,  let  the  apostle 


4 


^1 


fe,'  ••■•^ 


PUEIFICAIION   AND   BLESSING  OF  THE  E^B^H. 


28d 


■"»g; 


„f  the  Gentiles  assare  os  whether  we  «e  to  read  the  nam. 

•    11      ,  r.torallvhere      "For  I  was  wishing,   says  ne, 

^^Z^^^l^'i  fro»  Chrtat  for  my  brethren  ".y 

that  mybeu  were  a  israeUtes,  to  whom 

L  giving  orthe^w  ^d  t----  o^God...^^^^^^ 

PROMISES"  (Rom.  Ix.  3,  4).     11  ^ve  nd 

tn  who  were  Paul's  Unsmeu  according  to  the  fiesli,  we  c^         . 

..rjfe  off.    For  this  she  must  of  course  be  gathered 
Zl  Wm^-  and  so  she  shall  be,  but  itns  interesting  and, 
■iSt^otk  W««  this  national  restoration  and  eon^^  " 

"&ript™  leaves  us  in  no  doubt  eitlier  „ponthis||# 
The  s^e  apostle  mtimates  to  us,  what  .cbms  sostrangTand 
hardTbe  received  now,  that  it  will  not  be  by  the  gomg 
forth  of  the  gospel  as  at  present;  that  the  partial  b  mdness 
of  Israel  will  not  cease,  and  "  all  Israel  "-the  nation  as  a 
whor-wm  not  be  saved,  "  until  the  fulness  of  the  <^ntf  » 
ll  co^e  in  "    "  As  concerning  the  ,jospcl,"  he  adds,  "  they 
fve  enemies  for  your  sakes;  but  as  touching  the  election 
Teyare  beloved  for  the  fathers'  sakes:  for  the  grfts  and 
calling  of  God  are  without  repentance  "(Rom.  XI.  25-29). 

Thus  the  divine  purpose  holds,  announced  m  the  ancient 
Scriptures.  God  has  not  disinherited  the  peop  e  of  His 
choice  "Yet  for  the  present  blindness  m  part  is  theirs,  and 
ly^re  enemies  (God  is  holding  them  as  such)  with  regard 
to  the  gospel.  Not  till  the  full  number  of  the  Gentiles  is, 
brouaht  in  by  it  will  "  all  Israel "  be  saved. 

And  then,  how,  if  not  by  the  gospel?    Scripture  answers 
(Zech.  xii.  10-xiii.  1):  "They  shall  look  «Pon  mewhom. 
-ihey  have  pierced,  and  they  shall  mourn  for  Him  as  one 
moumeth  for  his  only  son,  and  shall  be  »f  t*"'?^^^"  ^.m 
as  one  that  is  m  bitterness  for  his  iirsM>om:  m  that  day 
there  shaU  be  a  great  mourning,  in  Jemsalem,  .  .  and  tM 


r 


2i40 


FAiJTS  AND  THEOUIRS  AS  JO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


>  . 
■» 


■  i 


land  shall  mourn,  every  family  apart.  .  .  In  that  cjay"  there 
shall  be  a  fouritaiii  opened  to  the  house  of  t)avid,  and  to  tho 
inhabitant8*.of'  Jef u><alem  for  Hin  and  for  uiu?Ieanncs«.'' 

H7w.v/.  shall  thov  soe'CluiKt  thus,  and  how?  With, the 
mental  eye  -pnly,  or  actually  ?    That  too  is  answered  :—  ^ 

"  Behold,  //i^  ennieth  with  clouds^  and  every  eye  shall  .See 
IllCn,  andjhey-aho yfKO  pierced'  Hrk,  .and  all  kindreds  of 
the  earth"- — or  " tribels -of  the  land,"  as  the  Greek  might 
read — ^^  s^mlltr^il  because  of  Illni.^''*         .-  .  '<  '• 

Here  then  is  Israel's  national  repentance,  and  how  it  is 
produced.  It  ,is  then,  when  the  Lord  Je^us  comes,  their 
*eyes  shall  see  Himj'aDd  thus  Israel's  bfessing,  and  that  of 
the  earth,  follow^s,  not  precedes,  that  for  which  w,e  as  Chris- 
tia,ns  'wafit,  to  "receive  the  fulfilment  of-heaveply,  and  not 
eartlhlyi  promises.  We  thus  see  how  it  is  that  the  gospel; 
as  now  goiifg  forth,  will  have  to  come  .to  an  end,  and  the 
fnlness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in.  All  is  consistent  here, 
for  it  18  true;  and  the  present  gospel  dispensation  is  thus 
seen  to-be  an  interval  in  Israel's  prophetic  history^  a  time 
of  the  suspension  of  her  pVomises,  only  suspended,  to  find,- 
as  soon  as  this 'has  run-out,  thek-  full  accomplishment. 

And   this  is  the  uniform  tenor  (5f  Scripture.     The  last 
chapter  of  Zechariah  proVes  convincingly  that  tho  Lord  God 
"and  His  holy  ones  will  have  coipe,  and  i||s  feet  have  stood 
oh  the  Mount  .of  Olives,  before  He  is  "King  over  all  the. 
earth,"  and  "in-that  diay  slmll  there  be  one  Lord,  and  His^ 
Name  one."       .       . '  '■■        -  -^^^ :  ■,  ,..-■  ■  _  ,       - 

^The  second  psahn  also*  speaks  with  perfect  plainness  of 
the  heathen  being  given  to  Christ  for  His  inheritance,  and 
the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  His  possession ;    but 

often  and  rightly  as  that  is  quoted  as  a  millennial  prophecy, 

■i>  , _^ ' '  .     , 

*  Ko^ovjai  In  avrov  jrddai  at  <pyXai  rr/iyi/i  (Rev.  r.  7).  It  is 
well  knowji  that  iil  Greek,  as  in  some  other  languages,  there  is  one  word 
which  stands  for  "  earth  "  and  "  land."  I  do  not  insist  on  the  latter, 
for  it  is  quite  according  to  the  chjtracter  of  the  New  Testament  to  be  of 
greater  breadth  than^he  Old.  But  the  reference  to  Zech.  xii.  JO  can- 
fibt  be  doul>ted.      •  »  >  .        %. 


N 


,■•■-■_•■  ■  ■*?*"■; 


,"   ■  t 


*> 


«py. 


N 


MS  not  aiJays,a«naeariy  se^t^^-*  P;-^»t:;«:^        ■ 

^ith  the  W.tWsrod  pf  iron  (ch.  u^25-2^,  ;^  ^.^.  ^.      . 

•  Thus  again,  therefore,  when  in  *''^ "''°"' °     AesVei  ■ 
,  „f.hP  hook  the  Lord  is  seen  coming  forth  tromneavei.    , 

Sl^St  of  Ihe  e^^th  (Rev.  -)• '' '^ '^IV'^^tS 

covering  of  the  br.de .^r  rpuV-  rilwws' th*C   millennial '  ■ 
"nshteoasness  of  samts.'     Then  tojiows  '■*-,. 
pLfuriwith  whieh,we  ninst.  become  mere  familiar.  »t  a 

-   ''"I^  to"l«  impossible  to ><iilarge  <>nnoW.    Bnt  iMeeds. ' 
tlnct  from  one  another,     in^  juugmcuy      . 

■5^"?^^|iSr6:d^ 

•   •  rRt*rr  5     SS^-^orthelivln^is  the  pimfica-.  ■; 
•      is  finally  to  give  everyone  pot  a  sharerm.Jhe_    first  resur 


V       V     ■'. 


■"•..■^^ 


■     ■«■.■■  .    '  .  ■  -      ■       ■    ■■  -■■^'  *.  I 


■    ■ 

'\  ^   '- 

■  :m 

'■■  ■■ 

'      ■   \  .  ■:  -  ■ 

•^:'::- 


.  M' 


>"Vfl, 


2^'      FAOTS  AND  THEOttiES-lkS  TO  A"  FUTURE  STATE. 

-•■'"'      .         /         .   ■  '  r  ' 

lennial  times  is  righteous  authoritative  ruli ,  in  which  (if  wo 
are  to  take  Scripturfc  simply)  the  saints  of  the  first  resurrcc- " 
tion  reign  with  Ilim,*  who  is  the  manifest  King  of  kings, 
and  Lord  of  lords.  ^  v 

There  is  one  glimpse  beyond,  this  millennial  conditioti  in 

Old  Testament  prophecy f  but  it  is  only  a  gliin})se.     The 

Lord  (in  Isa.  Ixv.  17,  Ixvi.  22)  announces*  '''Behold,  I  create 

new  heavens  and  a  now  earth;  and  the  former 'tehall  not  be 

remembered,  nor  come  into  mind."     T]ie  next  verses,  return 

evidently  to  the  millennial  condlf ion,  before  sin  and  death 

.  iare  finally  done  J^way.     Again,  lie  identifies  the  now  earth 

with  Israel's  pronijises :  *' For,  as  the  new  heavens  and  the 

new  earth  which  I  will  make,  shall  remain  before  me,  saith 

the  Lord,  so  shall  your  seed  and  your  nani#  remain."     But 

this  verse,  too,  is  parenthetical,  and  the  hitfxt  agaia  returns 

to  the  millennium.     It  is  plainly,  however,  to  these  passages 

that  the  apostle  Peter  refers,  when  he  saySj  "  We,  accordiiig' 

to  His  promise,  look  for  new  heavensf  and  a  new  earth, 

wherein  dwelleth  righteousness"  (2  Pet.  iii.  13).     The  only 

expansion  of  this  is  in  Rev.  xxi.  1-5.     We  cannot  dwell 

upon  it  now.     It  is  only  adduce^  ^s  giving  us  the  full  range 

of  "Old  Testament  prophecy.         \l 

.    As  I  have  said,  it  is  to  the  purificatory  judgment  of  the 

*  Rev.  Hi.  21  may  help  some  to  distinguisli  between  a  throne  in  which 
Christ  now  sits,  and  which,  being  the  throne  of  absolute  Godhead, 
the  Father's  throne,  mere  man  can  never  share,  and  a  throne  which  as 
Son  of  man  He  calls  His  own  (comi>.  ch.  i.  13),  and  which  lie  i)romises 
to  share  with  the  ovorcomers  here. " 

The  future  millennial  kingdom  is  thus  clearly  distinguished  from  the  . 
kingdom  of  Christ  as  Son  of  God  (Col.  i.  1.^)  in  whicli  we  now  are. 
That  future  Cfp^in  when  He  takes^^Iis  great  power  and  reigns  in  order 
to  bring  everything  into  subjeciiim  to  God  ;  and,  having  accomphshed  , 
this,  Het delivers  it  up  to  the  Father  (1  Cor.  xv.  21). 

One  other  caution.  The  reign  of  tlie  saints  with  Christ  over  the  earth 
does  not  imply  a  return  to  a^t^shly  condition,  the  gross  Chiliasm''V 
many  of  the  ancients.  The  lieavenly  and  earthly  spheres  are  always 
separate,  whatever  the  links  of  connection  in  that  time  whep  th^  new 
Jerusalem  comes  down  out  of  hf?aven. 

t  Only  the  atinodpherieheaxtmH,  which  are  dissolved  with  the  earth. 


^isA- 


But 


PUEIFICATION    AND    BLESSING   OF  THE   EARTH.       243 

earth  which  introducqs  the  millennial  blessing,  that  a  mass  of 
passages  relate,  which  are  brought  forward  to  prove  the  ex- 
tinction of  the  wicked.  '  When  only  quo  "  day  of  judgment 
is  thought  of,  and  that  the  judgment  of  the  dead  after  their 
resurrection,  such  passages  do  indeed  seem  to  have  force  m 
this  way.     But  it  is  gbne  as  soon  as  we  perceive  their  true 
appUcation.     And  this  is  as  true  of  some  New  Testament 
passages,  as  it  Is  universally  of  the  Old.     It  is  only  of  the 
Old  we  arc  speaking  now.     Lat  us  consider  some  of  these 
-^texts,  an^they  will  illustrate  the  truth  of  the  statements  we   ^ 

have  been  advancing.  ^  ^,         t  -n     • 

1  The  Psalms  abound  ,in  reference  twthis  time.  Passmg 
over  the  second  and  eighth,  which  connected*  give  us  the 
prophetic  outVme^  let -us  look  at  so|ie  more  detailed  state- 
ments in  the  ninth  :—*       -^ 

"  For  Thou  hast  maintained  my'  right :  ar. d    ray   cause  ; 
thou  satesffiin  the  thfone  judging  right."    Thou  hast  rebuked 
the  heathen,  Thou  hast  destroyed  the  wicked;  Thou  hast 
"pat  out  theirname  forever  and  ever.  .  .Buttlie  Lord  shall 
endure  forever :  He  hath  prepared  His  throne  for  judgn^ent :   . 
and  He  shall  judge  th(;  worlrl  in  righteousness,  He  shall 
mmister  judgracptto   the   people  in    uprightness.  .  .Sing 
praises  to- thc'Lord;  which  dwenethi*!  Zion;  declare  among 
the  people  His  doings.  .  .  The  wi^kcd'shaU  be  turnj^  into 
shcol :  all  the  nations  that  forget^  GojL^  W 

"vS  second'psalm  has  been  aheadjr  referred  to;  the  eighth  is  ap- 
plied V  the  apostle  (Heb.ii.  5^?  to  Christ's  reign  in  the.;'  world  to, 
come  ""  *rhat  iliis  term  applies^o  earth,  riot  heaven,  this  eighth  psalm 
witnesses  as  dues  the  expressiVin'  of  the  apostle  'rr/r  oiHov^uvff^ 
rvv  A/^ilXovdar,  "  the .  habitable  ^earth)  to  c<^e;'  the  expre«sior^ 
translated  "world  'in  Luke  iiit   ;   '         '    />     .  *"      ./ 

t  Goodwyn's  attempt  at  an  argument,  from/this  word  is  a  specimen 
of  the  kind  of  criticism  we  meet  with  in  sac|/writers  :— 

"  David  says  bv  the  Holy  Ghost,  'The  i^icked  shali  be  t>J.rned  back 
(shoov)  into  (sb'ol)  the  grave;  and  all  tlie  nations  that  forget^-God.' 
Havin«  been  raised  from  sh'ol  to  appear  before  the  great  white  throne, 


■'■    '•■'     ''fl 


death  relaxes  not  his  claim  upon  tbem,  but  in  the  eternal  embrare 
the  second',  snpplefnents  his  temporary  hold  at  the  first." 
This  is  pur'.'  imaaination.    TheTe  is  nothing:  about  the  resurrection 


k 


.,M, 


■  /; , 

I  :::• 

\. 


/-, 


^ 


i'K 


244        FACTS  AND  THF0RIE8  AS  TO  A  fUTlTRB  STATE. 

These  words  need  no  interpreter,  if  we  will  only  read 
them  literally  as  they  stand,  and  not  supplement  them  with 
other  statements  which  have  to  do  with  a  very,  different 
subject.  # 

The  thirty-seventh  psalm  has  been  niore  than  once  referred 
to.  It  should  be  carefully  read  in  connection  with  our 
present  theme.  But  pass  on  to  the  fifty-eighth,  and  listen, to 
language  which  people  quote  of  eternal  punishment;  it  ia 
again  judgment  upon  living  enemies :—  ,   ^ 

"  Break  their  teeth,  O  God,  in  their  moojth;  breakout  the 
teeth  of  the  young  lions,  O  Lord.  Let  them  )neU  away  as 
waters  wMch  run  continually;  when  he  bendeth  his  bow  to 
shoot  his  arrow,  let  them  be  as  cut  t>i  pieces.  As  a  spail 
which  melteth,  let  every  one  of  tliom  pass  away ;  like  the 
kirCtiinely  birth  of  a  womm^  that  they  may  not  see  the  sun. 
Before' your  pots  can  feel  the  thorns,  He  shall  take  them 
away,  both  living,  and  in  His  wrath.  The  righteous  shall 
rejoibe  when 'he  seeth  the  vengeance;  he  shall  wa^h  his 
footsteps  in  the  blood  of  the  wicked.  So  that  a  man  shall 
say,  Verily  th6re  is  a  reward  for  the  righteous :  verily,  He  is 
a  God  that  judgeth  IX  THE  EAHTii." 

In  a  similar  \Vay  speak  the  83rd  psalin,  the  101st,  the 
ll^th,  the  14fitth ;  but  there  is  no  use  quoting  testimony  of 
the  same  kind  repeatedly.     But  we-must  look  a  little  at  the 

prophets.  •    •'■    ',  ■'■,"■■'.■■     '^    ''-':''' 

saiah  describes  in  his  first  chapters  "  the  day  of  the  Lord 
osts  "  upon  the  pride  of,  man,  and  here- again  we  find 
similar  expressions : —     ■  '  '  ' 

■  ' Therefore. s'aith 'the  Lord, 'the  Lord  of  hosts,  the  Mighty 
One  .of  Israel,  Ah,  I  will  ease  me  of  mine  /id  versaries,  and 
avenge  me  of  mine.)lenemie8 ;  .  .  .' .  Zion  shall  be  redeemed 
with  judgment,  and  her"  converts   with  righteousness ;  and 

of.  the  dead  in  the  passage,  but  thp  destruction  of  living   enemies  ;  • 
nothing  about  the  great  white  throne,  hut  God  dwelling  tn  Zion  ;  iwhile 
the  "  turned  hack  "  refers'  to  the  3rd  verse,  where  the  same  word  is  used  : 
"  when  mine  enemies  are  turned  hack"  i.  e.,  from  their  assault  upon  the 
people  of  God.  ^    »  •■     ' 


«    »W«   niir^RlNG   OF  TBE  EABTH.       245  f 
tUElFlOATlON  AJfD  BLLSSi^u  wr   i**  . 

?£  It™"!';;— -  «.»> "«'"'"'  "'"•■"7,1  ■ 

dayUiemckedr         ?, ,   -  ■  „"   ._.„^e  of  mUlehniamrtace     - 
Thpn  follows  a   well-known  picture  oi  t    ,  v, 

T  of  the  reL'ithering  an.V  reunion  of  Ephraim  Sn.l  JiKlah 

ri:^,  gve'u;  ,he  principle  V  these  judgments   and 
,^      ii  ™  ,„  PntVa  (lealmas  with  Israel ;  Bee  espeQially. 

r'r^i  i      But  evl  toVir'W  the  pa«ge«  whlch.treat 

«:s^:5iSSiESb 

.    go  forth  Mid  £owp  be  ashes  mider  the 


teRT 


;,flJ;«ral  d-mculty)  with  ,«  the  other  prophece,  of 


f^     2i0 


FACTg  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STAT t,. 

Wes!^  ''"^^  ;^^/«--^^'«  JudgmeBt  i^  order  to  earth's 

toZ^fl'oTlV^'"'  ''^''  ^-ring  of  the  typical  sys- 
torn  of  the  OM  Teslament  upon  our  pre«bnt  subje^. 

•■-■,■      ■§'- 


,  ^  CHAPTER  XXV.      ^    ^-^     — 

OLD   TESTAMENT  SnADOWS.  ■ 

r*  r^  ,•  /  '""'"""^ '■*■'.?<'  "<■  the  Old  Testament  future 
tim  he  bo  ,ef„f  the  people  plainly  wont  beyoml  it.  C 
,^nly  doe.  ,1,0  opinio  to  the  Hebrews  toil  „.  ,hat  Abraham 
Isaac  and  Jaeob  confossed  themselves  pilgrim.  upon^arA' 
woJ"  f /'"  "  "•■™«"'y-«nt.y"".:,t  alsoTe  "  y' 
word  used  by  our  Lord  for  hell-Gehenna-seems  toha7e 
v^  ;  :;a:"  ='?":'''.""',P-Pt''«f<-  -•  T-ord-s  tim.  in  that 
TltZ  ,     .u  '"''      "  "  '"■'>«•'''''.?<'  apparently  in  opno. 

s.t.on  to  the  statements  of  the  last  ohapters.     B,it  any  one 
.need  only  read  carefully  the  first  halfof  the  booko  OeLr 
^  be  .pnte  clear  a,  least  as  to  Abraham  tha,   there  1,  no 
prom,se  at  all  of  heaven  ,„  him  recorded  there.     How    hen 
.d  he  obtam  the  assurane.  of  there  being  in  stor  Ir  hto 
a  heavenly  country  "  ?  .  ■'■mm 

^  One  of  two  things,  could  alone  be  supposed.  There  wa's 
ether  an  unrecorded  promise;  or  else  ho  must  harbren 
given  to  see  very  plainly  the  typical  character  of  thbl^ 

^^^tTJ:T,  T  *'T  "'"-^  -rVruths  which  X/ 
JNew  Testament  shows  us  he  had  received.     Abraham'scall 

to  Canaan  was  the  pcr/bct  symbol-of  our  "  heavenly  t^Hn?; 


It  is 


-iv«H- 


ttis  <; 


'>llllll/wt.l..   1 ..< 5 1—. : ■ ^ -. "     ''"^ — **" 


ishna. 


««- 


a  ''*"""*"''>'  by  the.  Jenxshdoct<,r.s  since  '    It  is  no*  «.  a  ■   '  ." 


/  -. 


V. 


■"•^^ 


-  '     ULl)   TESTAMENT  SHAD0W8. 

but  how  be  cQuiahavG  understood  it  ao,  wo  may  be  at 
lo«»  to  comi.r.lien.l.     Yet  Houie  thiug«  there  were  that  raigh 
hive  aided' groatiy  ii»  thiw.  ij 

Man  had  been  .hat  out  of  Para.li»o  two  thousand  ye^js 
-heforo  and  ReveUtion  ends  with  the  picture  of  another 
PaSU  heavenly;  not  earthly,  into  which  those  that  h^o 
"  washed  their  robes"  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb  shall  be^^d^ 
Jtted.  No  one  doubts,  save  an  infidel,  that  here  W-n  , 
I  first  garden  of  God  was  a  type  of  the  other.  Had  jhe 
-lecret  then  been  shut  up  those  two  thousand  years.-aHso- 
lately  shut  up-tl.at  there  was  in  it  some  such  meanmg  < 

Our  suppositious  in  su.ha  matter  may  not  possess  nf  cl 
value;  but  we  are  seeking  to  account  in  this  way  for  alfac| 
It  lealt  not  to  be  denied,  of-Abraham's  havmj;  a  ''"''^''f  f 
of  that  which  certainly  does  not  appear  upon  the  &ce  <rt  tno 
inspired  record.     And,  our  attention  being  turned  tol  this 
we  camiot  but  notice  how  much  the  divine  way  w^s  in  Jhose 
Trly  flays  to  teach  by  type  and  figure.    Did  Abel  know 
notldn.'  of  the  sig.,ificanco  of  that "  more  excellent  sacnfice 
liel^by  faith  he  offered V    And    if  the   "seed  of  the 
::„man-'p,.kc,aswek„owit  did  speak  o.  «  ^^--^ 
,„,„e,lt  spoke  still  in  the  language  ot  type  ot  the  brms 
;,;,  of  thJ  serpent's  head.     In  Abraham's  yis.on.t  was  a 
figure  spoke,  though  with  so«.c  interpretation  ^<"'- ^ 
So  .Ta..obs  ladder;  and  still  u.ore  the  myst«,ou«  n.ght- 
X'stling,  wi-,l>  its  couse,,«ence  of  a  halting  th.gh      Joseph 
.Ireams  still  exemplity  this  way  of  the  divine  .eaching:   an. 
so  the  drcatns  which  he  interprets.     I,,  these  and  Lndar     - 
stances  we  find  not  merely  the  nse  of  type  -'l  J?-'.  - 
of  these  as  things  ©hose  significance  was  knowr.  *"  th«  _peo 
IL  whose  time  tSy  happened.    They  show  us  that  these 

tre  the  language  of  the  day,  «-'->>•  "''^f^^Xtv 

-   ligible  when  first  uttered,  however  much  the  full  mysterj. 

waited  for  revelation,  when  the  appointed  ttme  should  be 

c^ome. 


^il  more  would  this  be  so  as  the  word  -'^J^i^ 
gradually  to  its  full  proportion,  and  the  meamng  of  tl|law 


"T»~ 


i?^ 


% 


iM' 


T«iir 


l^C*rs  AND  THEOBIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUKE  StATK. 


came  to  be  untbMed  by  the  luophotB,  ])artial  though  the 
'(^iiiohlirit;  were.  Aii«l  thouixli  the  ]>eo|)le  were  hideed  blind 
-  uud  ^rnajj  even  thw  would  not  hinder  the  attuinnicut  of  u 
-  fertain  body  of  truth  as  orthodoxy,  wliUe  the  pomt  and 
I'-ower  of  it  as  beariiig  practically  upon  themselves  might  be 
denied.  Such  exactly  was  the  later  Pharisaism  which 
carried  with  it  the'  mass  of  the  people.  And  such,  in 
the  higtory  of  the  Christian  church,  was  the  Nic^ae  ortho- 

-  doxy^  «  / 

-Wo  may  thus  account  then  for  a  knowledgo^in  Israel 

.     beyOhd  the  j^pparent  measure  of  the  revelation  that  had  been 

;    made  to  them.     We  have  only  to  suppose  ( what  is  other- 

,y        ,.  wise  indicated  also)  that  the  great  system  of  types  which 

thcMf  law  embodied  was  not  wholly  unknown  to  them;  and 

while  the  ministry  of  death  and  condemnation  was  allowed 

to  have  its  full  effect,  and  the  consistency  of  purpose  was 

maintained  throughout,  the   light  was  allowed   in   another 

,       way  to  shine,  even  if  dimly,  through  the  wonderful  imagery 

in  the  midst  of  which  they  moved. 

This  was  surely  divine  wisdom.  But  let  us  seek  to  realize 
a  little  how  far  beyon<l  tlie  usual  thought  of  it,  this  typical 
character  of  the  Old  Testament  books  extends. 

All  must  of  course  admit  (who  are  not  infidels)  the  figur- 
ative nature  of  the  tabernacle  and  temple  service.  Priest, 
altar,  sacrifice  and  sanctuary  we  must  allow  to  have  their 
inner  meaning,  for  the  New  Testament  so  reads  them  all. 
But  the  Xew  Testament  finds  such  also  in  far  other  things: 
in  the  details  of  Israel's  history,  their  Passover  and  lied  Sea 
deliverance,  the  manna,  the  water  from  the  rock.  "  All  these 
things,"  says  the  ai>ostle,  "happened  unto  them  for  ensam- 
ples  (literally,  types )l*^and  are  written  for  our  admonition, 
__  npon  whom  the  ends  of  the  world  (or  ages)  are  come" 
(1  Cor,  X.  11).  But  this  typical  teaching  is  not  even  con- 
fined to  Israel's  hisrory :  we  have  similar  explanations  as  to 
Adam  and  his  wife  (Rom.  v.,  Eph.  v.),  the  flood  and  the  ark 
(1  Pet.  iii.),  Melchize<]ek  (Heb.  vii.),  Abraham's  wives  and 
_     sons  (Gal  iv.),  with  more  than  a  hint  as  to  the  offering  up 


f-" 


m 


and  view  tho  rest  of  it 
UH  explanation  rather 


Lh 


tiich.  is  applicable  a'.l 
fe  bne  hand,  we  must 
^es  given  us  by  our  Lord 


,  OLD  TEHtABtBNT  SUADOWP  249 

of  Isaac  (Gal.   iii.  16,  17).     Thus  theliistory  itself  (while 
of  course  true  and  divine)  is  typical  and  prophetic  also. 
-Guided^thus  far  by  the  word  of  (lod    are   we  to  sop 
*^»"  *  ,  1        *•   ^  .itj""    "••'»  »ri"«r  fhn  rest  OI  It 

where  the  actual  explanation^^ 

as  history  simply  ;  or  are  w^^ 
as  the  estaiblishment  of  a  pi^ 
through  the  historical  books^ 
remember  that  many  of  the  fa.-  -       „  - 

„r.'ivcn  without  interpretation,  and  that  we  .re  left  to  fi.M 
thlln  the  figurative  meaning  of  words  elBewhere,  «id  the 
Lrine  of  Scripture  generally.  On  the  other  hand  who 
:,d  ignore  a  deeper  meaning  in  sueh  a  "t-X -;'-;  °  . 
JoseplCfor  which  meanmg  yet  no  expreBH  warrant  of  mspi, 

r'ltion  can  be  produced  ?  ,     .  i    * 

It  seems  plain  then  that  we  are  to  apply  the  pnnc.ple  to 
the  h  Iry  I  general.  And  here  what  a  field  o  research 
presents  iLlf  and  how  marvellously  light  l.reaks  out  m 
new  and  unlooked  for  places  in  the  Old  Testament !  _ 

From  tho  first  Eden,  over  now  six  thousa.^«W».  we  ook 
on  to  another,  brighter  and  more  blessed,  diWown  1  a  a- 
I  °  where  the  tree  of  life,  in  new  luxuriance  and  beauty 
hlnUits  glorious  fruitage  over  the, perpetual  stream  that 
flows  frorS  the  throne  of  God  Itself.    Who  can  m.ss  the 
comparison,  albeit  no  doubt  there  is  contrast  .also,  between 
S  two?    Who  can  fail  to  see  that  the  one  ..s  designed 
to  be  the  sha<low  of  the  other ;  and  that  the  contrast  .s  but 
to  remind  us  that  the  first  is  onJy  the  shadow,  and  cannot 
be  the  very  image  of  that  before  whose  transcendent  beauty, 
all  pictures  and  forecasts  fail  ?    The  first  scene  >s  the  eartt 
ly  and  the  fleeting;  the  second  heavenly.and  eterm  .    tarth 
is  made  the  mirror  of  heaven,  as  indeed  to  mortal  eyes  (.t 
1^  ITm  seem)  must  be,- fo  convey  to  us  what  "eye  ha  h  no 
"^  IZ  nor  e>i  heard,"  but  which  "Ood  hath  (never, l,elcs^) 

revealed  to  us  by  ««  ^Pi'":",^ ;  ^...:W.„.;„«»nt  visi™.  of 


When  .WO  look  further  at  tho  New  To^tnment  vision 


.the  New  Jerasalem,  we  find  a  new  and  most  ^r>t<>ve.ms 
link  with  the  Old  Testament.    Let  any  one  compare  that 


«> 


#'' 


'is.. 


250        F  VCTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUJIE  STATE.    '  ' 

picture  of  future  blessedness  with  which  Ezekiel  closes,  with 
this  closing  scf^e  of  our  last  Apocalypse,  and  say  if  the  cor- 
respondence hetween  tlie  t\yo  can  possibly  be  undesigned. 
The  waters  flowing  from  the  house  of  the  Lord;  in  Ezekiel, 

.  bring  life  even  iwto  the  salt  sea ;  "  and  by  the  river  upon  the 
bank  thereof  on  this  sifte  and  on  that  side,  shall  grow  all  trees 

,  for  meat,  whose  leaf  shall  not  flid^,  neitiier  shall  the  fruit 
thereof  be  consumed  :  it  shall  bring  forth  new  fruit  according 

,  to  his  months!,  because  their  wJftersHhey  issued  out  of  the 
sanctuary,  and  the  fiuit  thereof  shall  be  for  meat,  and  the 
leaf  theii^of  for  modicine"  (ch.  xlvHr'VJ).  Who  can  rcfuso 
the  connection  witli  the  account  in  Rcyelatiort:  "And  he 
showed  me  a  [>ure  river  of  water  of^iffe,  clear  as  crystal, 
proceeding  out  of  the  throne  of  God  and  of  the  Lamb.     In 

:  the  niidst  of  tlie  street  of  it,  and  on  either  side  of  the  river, 
was  there  tlie  tree  'of  life,  which  bare  twelve  manner  of 
fruits,  and  yielded  her  fruit  every  month,  and  the  leaves  of 
the  tree  were  for  Ihe  healing  of  the  nations "  (Rev.  xxii. 

'1,2).  ,     ,      ^        r   -  .  .  ^     .     .„     \ 

Yet  there  are  contrasts  also  bp'twocii  the  two  descriptions. 
In  the  one  case  there  are  limits  to  the  bles.sing  which  we 
do  not  find  in  the  otlu'r,  as,  for  instance,  thCj  marshy"^ 
places  are  yet  given  to  salt^(Ezek.  xlvii.  11);  and  the  one  is 
connected  with  an  earthly  city  and  a  temple,  while  in  the 
"  heavenly  Jerusalem  "'  no  temple  is  seen  (Rev.  "xxi.  22). 

Thus  here  again  wo  find  the  true  ch.-iftacters  of  OhVTesta- 
mcnt  types.  The  earthly  is  the  pattern  of  t ho  heavenly. 
The  law  has  a  shadow  of  good  things  to  come,  but  not  the 
very  image  (Ileb.  x.  1).  ' 

'  But  then  this  shows  us  that  not  only  th6  past  history  but 
the  prophetic  future  also  contaihs  its  types.  And  that  the 
millennial  age,  Avhich  the  prophecy  in  Ezekiel  speaks  of,  ij^in 
part  at  least  a  picture  for  earth's  inhabitants  of  things. out- 
side; of  earth.  Visible  signs  of  divine  pnver*  will  bVing 
them  face  to  fimc  as  it  were  with  eternal  realities.  It  will  bo  . 
*  So,  Hoi),  vi.  .J,  ii;iiacles  are  calleglVpowera  of  Ute  world  (qt  agej' 


to  come.' 


H  ■    ,  n 


'■•  rtS.         * 


'        « 


OLD  tESTAMEHT  SHADOWS. '«' 


251 


■(I    .  I 

■.:,**:■■ 

\  *"-,' 

>  ■  ■  \ , 

'•'   ■■\  "\. 

'V  V; 

}:'>%" 

'■^VaI 

■  '\:  '■ 

M 

i'!      ;. 

■',"l,.' 

•  ahnrt  in  a  very  importaut  way,  a  anal  dispimsation  of  >.ia'>t, 
'  fh„  ;  mlSnt  have  b=cu  o»V««A.  Introduced,  by 
a,  tho»c  l'"-*-^""'?;.  .  ^,„,  the  .uanifestatiou  of  the  risen 
the  appeann^  of  C^"^'' ;"y;^.,,,„„,-„-  uteousness  will  be 
a„apertected8onBa»,Goa  thV.u  no      y  ,,^^1 

irt:    thl  olwt/hattL  in  K.eJ.i  pictured 
t    bless."! which  reaect  the  heavenly  and  eternal  one8,so 
tthe  other  hand  does  Isalah.Bhow  uathe  shadow  of  .ts  . 
::M  o;Ste,  by  wh,eh.  men  will  be  brought  as  .t  were 
face  to  face  with  "  eternal  judgment    ;— 

"Za  it  shall  come  to  pass  *=''«•»■"»"<'  ^1  Tfleh 
another.and  from  -  «...bat^  to  — ^^ 

Jr::ce  to  anot^r  judgment  of  wh^^^^^^^^^^ 

^iClcfber^rwordlL^rse  o/the  Old  Test, 
ditteience  D  ^  ^^^^^^  ,^^  ^^^  blessing)  a 

rt  rtween  ^he  oil  T.taint  and  the  Kew^   But  in 

no  mere  ngure,  as  Jii.  A>'"       .  i?R„  m    Thp  sol- 

i.^o  Trinmnh  of  the  cause  of  true  religion.       me  soi 
:::t:dr:7:o:.admitof,being  e.plained  m  tb.w,. 
It  would  not  give  them  meaning  but  evacuate  .       Ani  ye 

■  what  is  surely  a  reality  is  also  a  symbol  too.    It  is  ttie  ae 
:g:dc:ntrit,ope„ly'ma„ife,tcdtoth;*eyesof^ 

■  day  with  the  living  witer  aowingtrom  Jerusalem      JIure 

■  ISfhe  symbol  ^  efei-nal  life,  and  here  the  shadow  of 
rs^n/alt..^  &ch  with  its  tale  to  ..U  "!  *-- °^ 
-   the' milk,mnalnations,-thiH  warning,  that  mv.tmg.  Gods 

lofit  inrtCai  to  liian  thi;:  aide  of  eternity. 
:;|^S^ay  gives  „.  the  OM  Testament  wirti^om. 
nixd  in  full  harmony  \vith  itself,  atid  with  that 


^f^ 


completeness) 


■'•■;■    ■     » 


] 


N? 


\ 


252  ''    FACTS  ANt)  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


later  revelation  which  supplements,  it,  in  which  both  life  and 
incorruption  are  fully  brought  to  light,  and  also  the  second 
deathkis  seen  to  be  what  the  first  shadows,  as  it  is  that  to 
wliklifinally  also  it  j^ives  place.  We  must  not  even  here, 
howi'wr,  expect  to  have  done  with  tigurefe,  for  still  we  see 
in  part  and  we  })rpphe8y  in  part,  and  the  things  with  whicb 
we  have  to  do  are  still  seen  but  "  through  a  glass,  darkly  " — 
in  a  riddle  or  enigma.        ^ 

But  whatever  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God  is  given  for 
our  instruction,  and  we  must  patiently  and  humbly  take 
God's, word  as  He  has  written  it,  and  see  if  it  deals  in  "am- 
biguous metaphors,"  and  .whether  perhaps  we  may  not'  find 
there  the  truth  of  which  we  are  in  search.  % 


CHAPTER  XXVI. 


THE  AGES  OP  ETERnItY:— THE  QUESTION  STATED. 

We  are  again  stopped,  upon  the  threshold  of  the  New 
Testament.  Stopped,  by  the  need  of  considering  £1  question 
of  the  utmost  imporiin^e  to  our  present  subject.^  It  is 
gravely  asked  whether  we  have  any  proper  word  for  eter- 
\  nity  in  Scripture,  in  the  sense,  that  is,  in  which  we  ordinarily 
understand  the  word  "  eternity."  For  even  this  the  eccen- 
tricity of  a  lew  learned  men  would  take  from  us  by  an 
etymological  sleight  of  hand  which  is  sca,Tcely  creditable  to 
them.  "  Eternal "  is  "  ccy /ternair — age-lasting.  So  Mionh.\ 
Dr.  Fart-'ar  tells  us,  is  "  translated  rightly  and  frequently  by 
'  eternal,'  and  wrongly  and  unnecessarily  by  "  everlasting.'  "* 

But  again  "  everlastiiig  "  is  in  the  same  .dilemma,  for  of 
coarse  it  only  means  "  lasting  ever,"  and  "an  ey^rgreenis  not 
a  tree  green  to  all  eternity,  but  a, tree  continously  green 

durinds  its  life."t  ,.       ■ 

— i — \ ^, • 

*  "  Etfernal  Hope,"  Preface,  xxxiv. ^ 

t  "  Hist.  Doctrinip  Script.  Roiribution,"  p.  128. 


tH- 


■«*r    i 


'ft 


..^ 


TflE  AGES  O^'^l^BNlTY^  253 

So  that  we  are  in  some  doubt  a8  to  our  English  even 
The  word  "  endless  "  is  getting  to  displace  «  eternal,^  bi^  as 
„o  word  of  exactly  that  m<?aning'  is  found  in  the  New  les- 
tament   hi   any  connection^^^f  interest  to   tfe  here  we  are 
practically  left  without  any  t^vfe  word  in  it  for  what  for  want     ' 
of  a  better  term  I  must  still  call  "  eternity,"  at  all  '     .  . 

Authorities  also  diffe-  Mr.  Oxeilftam  thmks  that  the 
«  word  al5zo,  might  be  expected  from  its  1»oot  a.,  to  mean 
^everlasting'  m  the  stActest  sense^^-*  while  Dr.  Beecher 
assures  us  that  "  in  the  lieW  Testament  aei  is  neyer  used  m 
the  sense  of  eternity  ."t       .  -  .  .  ^  ^    ^  ^^^ 

We  must  inquire,  there^re,  for  ourselves ;  although  we 
shall  not  refuse  the  help  that  those  more  learned  than  we 
can  pretend  to  be  can  give  us  iii  the  matter.  ^  - 

The  words  with  which  we  have  to  do  are  m  the  Greek 
buttwq;  aion  and  aionios  {dzM  dta^vco,).    They  havi^been 
Anglicised  intQ  *on  and  aeonial,  a^d  these  terms,  although 
not  naturalized  in  our  language,  we  may  find  it  convenient 
'  for  our.present  purpose  to  retain.  -The  phrases  "forever 
and  "forever, and  ever"  in  our  common  Bibles  are  liter- 
ally  •'  for  the  «on,"  "  for  the  SBons,"  "  %the  *Jna,  of  aeons, 
and  akin  to  terms  in  the  Old  Testament  where  the  Hebrew 
wx)rd  "olam"   taH.es  the  place  of  *on.  ^^  « Etefnal     and  . 
"  everlasting  "are  both  renderings  gf  the  word  "  aeonial. 

It  is  upon  the  ground  of  this  phraseology  that  the  argu- 
ment is -built,  that'aeonial  cannot  be  in  thecSltrict  sense  "eter- 
nal ^   "  For  the  aeon  "  cannot  be  "  fo't  eternity,"  because  tlfere 
are  »on8,  and  aons  of  seons;  and  you  cannot  so  reduplicate 
eternity.     Gonial,  « beloning   tcr   the   aeon,"  consequently 
cannot  imply  a  longer  time  than  the  "  ^on  "  to  which  it  be- 
longs:   ^oti,  moreover,  in>  Scripture  itself  is  translated  by 
»/orld"  between  thirty  and  forty  times,  and  twice  m  the 
plural  by  "ages,"  and.  this  lastvTord  seem^  to  afford  the 
^     Lst  consistent.rendering  all  through.^  '^^Tt^iZ 
L  that  case  would  be  « the  life  of  the  age  "or  "the  ttfe  of  the 
world  to  come,"  and  "  eternal  punishment;'  ofccour^p,  must 


•^ 


r 


t  "Hist.  Retribution,"  p.  I'i^. 


*  "  Letter."  \>.  17. 


..\ 


-i'U. 


li'. 


■    •     ■     ,:>'.      '      ■    h 


254        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.     ,.  ] 

be  harmonized  with  this:  it  canuot  or  need  not  be  an  endless 

punisiiment.  .  .        „ 

Mr.  Jukes,  in  his  "  Ilestitutiou  of  All  TJiingsi,"  goes  a  good, 
way  further.  He  contends  tha^  these  ages  of  which  Scrip- 
ture speaks,  and  of  which  the  -heathen  writers  understood 
nothing,  refer  to  ''  Christ's  nie(.liatorial  kingdom,  which  is 
'  for  the  ages  of  ages,'  and  must  yet  be  'delivered  up  to  the 
Father,  tJiat  God  may  be  allin  ^il'  "    -    ,        pl 

•'Thci  'ages,'   therefore  (he  says),  are  periods  in  which  God 
works,  because  there  is  evil  and  His  rest  is  broken  Ijy  it,  but 
which  have  atP  end  aud  pass  away,  when  the  work  appointed  to 
be  done  in  tliem  has  been  accomplished.     The  *  ages,'  ^ke  the 
'days  '  of  creation,  speak  of  a  prior  f all  :  they  are  the  '  times'  in 
which  God  works,  because  He  cannot  rest  in  sin  and  misery. 
His  perfect  rest  is  not  in  the  'ages, '  but  beyond  them,  when  the 
luediatorial  kingdom,  which  is  '  for  the  ages  of  ages,'  is  delivered 
np,  anllChrist,  by  whom  all  thi;ags  are  wrought  in  the  ages,  goes^ 
])ack  to  the  glory  which  He  had  '  before  the  age-times '  (2  Tim,  i.  9, 
Tit.  i.  2),  that  God  may  be  all  in  all.     The  words  'Jesus  Christ 
(that  is.  Anointed  Saviour),  the  same  yesterday,  tp-day  and  for  the 
ages,' imply  that  through  these  ages  a  Saviour  is  needed,  and 
/"will  be  found,  as  much  as  to-day  and  yesterday.     It  will,  I  tliink, 
too,  be  found,  that  the  adjective  founded  on  this  word,  whether 
applied  to  '  life,'  '  puuishment,'  '  redemption,' '  covenant,'  'times,' 
or  even  God  Himself,  is  always  connected  with,  remedial  labor, 
and  with  the  idea  of  '  ages '  as  periods  in  which  God  is  working 
to  meet  and  correct  some  awfid  fjdl.  .  .  .  Nor  does  this  aflfect  the 
true  eternity  of  bliss  of  God's  elect,  or  of  the  redeemed  who  are 
brought  back  to  live  in  God,  and  to  be  partakersx)f  Christ's  *  end- 
less life  '  (Heb.  vii.  IG),  of  whom  it  is  said,  'Neither  can  tliey  die 
any  m<jre,  for  they  are  equal  uuto  the  angels,  and  are  the  children 
of  God,  being  the  children  of  the  resurrection  ; '  for  this  depends 
upon  a  liarticipation  iu  the  divine  nature,  and  upon  that  powder 
which  can  change  these  vile  bodies,  that  they  may  be  fiwihioned 
like  unto  Christ's  glorious  body,  accordijig  to  the  working  where- 
by He  is  able  to  subdue  even  all  things  unto  Himsell"  (Rest., 
pp.  61-G8.)  • 

This  has  the  advantage  of  being  very  definite  doctriiie, 
-and  as  such  it  eafi  be  examined  and  compared  with  Scrip- 


M 


THE  AGES   OF   ET?ERKltY. 


255 


tut:e.  Thi#  we  hope  to  <loin  rletail  •  presently.  .  ^ut  first,  it 
seems,  we^ave  to  look  at  these  words  outside  of  Scripture, 
,  und  in  their  roots  and  beginnings  Iti  oi^diiia|;y  Greek. 
'  Dr.  Beecherhas  taken  up  this  subject  in  a  rather  elaborate 
way,  following 'out  the  suggestions  of  Dr.  Tayler  Lewis,  ' 
which  may  be  read  in  the  «  Gen^is  "-and  "  Ecclesiastes  "  of 
Lange's  Comm^entary.*  We  may  sum  up  Dr.  Beccher's 
statements  in  a  much  briefer  Way  without  detriment  (we 
think)  either  to  their' clearness  or  their  force.  ^ 

He  first  of  all  examines  the  proof  of  «iow  meaning  eternity 
troH^^  Aristotle's   (tcrivation    of  it?  from   -ael  o7i  {net  qjv)~^ 
•'  always  existing."    Two  "questions  arise  fi-om  this :  is^  this 
etymology  cd^MectV  and  if  so,  is  it  ilecisive  of  the  matter? 
On  the  first  pointh«  concedes  it  to  be  correct  for  the  sake 
of  arirument,  although  suflicient  reasons  could  be  given  for 
rejecting  it,  iinil  Plato  and  ^ri^otle  were  very  poor  ety- 
mologists.    As  to  the  second  he  objects  t]^s^ael  does  not| 
always,  or  even  commonly,  denote  or  imply  eternity,  and,  in 
this  passage  it  manifestly  does  ndt^and  to  grve  it  that  sense 
mvolves  Aristotle  in  inconsistency  and  absurdity,  ,and  in 
a  war  with  notorious  facts^in  th'e  history  of  the  .Gre^^n- 
guage."        ,  "  9r- -...-,  _    , 

Thislasti^by  itself  decisive,  ar|d  we  need*  not  look  further  ' 

at  the  question  of  derivation.     The£^stant  m,eaiiin_g  of  aion 
in  Homer  is  by  all  admitted  to  be^fe  "  :  to  "Jg^atbe  out 
.  .  one's  «/oh"  was  to  clie.    ;  >•   •        •     ,         ^^-  -  '  ^ 

"  iVom  this  flbstra^'t  idea  of  '  life  '  it  passed  to  a  concrete 
form  to  denote  a  living  spirit,  an  a  ?  o3 ;,  or  aeon."  This  mean- 
ing occurs,  not  in  Homer,  but  in  Euripides,,  and  is  found  at 
a'latcr  period  in  Epictetus,  who  declares  that  he  is,not  an 
){teon  (a  spirit)  but  k  man.  "^The  element  of  time  in  any 
form  is  not  mcluded  in  these  original  uses  of  the  word,"  says^ 
Dr.  Beechcr.t    ' 


% 


t 


/■ 
'I 


■^ 


■     *  Special  Iiflroductioii  to  tlio  First  Chapter  of  ^fenesis.  Part  3,;  land        , 
his  excursus  on  "  Olamic  or  iEonian  Words  in  Scriptnre/'^cclesiastes,,      ^ 

pp.  44-51.  ^  '■  .     '  '    , 

/       iHe  would  not  deny  it.  I  suppose,  thm  by  Arrian's  time,  the  meaning    '. 


*•     V 


-con- : 
umda^  an*  idea  ot 


MX 

#1 

»*  gi^Ki 

■  "^p 

I^^I 

Lv'fJ 

i^-s''3^ 

nW^'^^M 

w. 

^ri 

I  wofi 

JOU8.  ti 

irati^of  \\^4 
tbif  reat  po^t 


^^ainan,  also  com^to  denote 
'ana  thpn  a  period  Arked  with 
ante/lUuvian  age  oMhe  Mosaic 
that  pprM,BO'W«t^ 


■'ibovo*ei.turto  V  Biffih  writers  as  HptW^i;, »»*  ^e 
iopHon  ana  Th'«cycttd«3i  buV  we  <Jo  not  j^ct  .<^e  to  the  • 

.  '-'^ut  Dr.  Beochte  admits  tlktefterwards  ^.-e  do  find  the 
^  -  W  i-The  orisi^ial  i%*of  fife  was  {atriength)  subord^ 
Isi  &L.r  disan^Wfed.  *nd  id^as  of  time  alony^ook  posses- 


'  VMfcmity:  for  time,  ;,' wnen  i..  .»  'l";'""^",  "f , ", ''X;  fi^t  this  / 
Innlinir  totality, acquires  the  sense  oicterrtity.      At  tiist  tins  / 

4Si.i--l^ctive  was  c.pre».ca;  Jmt  h/'degrees  came  to 

'^  rSmes  impUed  and  n,d.rstoo,l,  and  ">.«,»  >M  th^J. 

■    .««tfew(«Wi«y,  was  used.lbt  eternity .<"■  .        ,^^ 

«  J  ^n  timp  thatlRforever,  and  to  eter^MMr'Sncll  ciw^ 
Cromer  r^  U«Milean»  'for  the  f«ture|H|.£or  all  t^ne 
Ke     Batthis  same  form  that  may  thusH^temlty,  yay : 

\  ^'":^;ro  is  still  another^sc  of  «/o«,  iutrfla^.M^o^to  do- 
\  notrkiud^of  philos«phfe.a^..nity,  from  .Inch  past.  .pr.smvt. 


1 

n 

(J 
1 

* 

1 


oven 


.f  ....Vnl;  l.as  entereVi,vto  this  "H'^'^^*'""  :^  "l;",;;^;^^^  ^ 

"'    '^'■'^""  ■ — . ,   .       ...t   Af  a  1  things   as  an 


„„rJ,  are  .--t  am  not  a.  .r.^.  ««  a  n,au.  fm^^^^^^    «,, 
l,„ur  of  ihfrday,  I  must  »ubsUt  «»  a"  hour,  audB^.a)  as  an  How. 


-f"^ 


*,if-l 


r;>' 


THE   AGES   OF   ETERNITY. 


257 


m 


r 


future  tiirie  are  eUminated,  md  absolute  being  only  fe  re- 
|ied.r'     ■/     v';-    '■  "■■  :, 

,  •:  I  have  ttius  far  followed  Dr.  Beecher,  as  his  account  of 
Mhe  matt^  seemsito  be  on  the  whole  correct.     I  have  n<rth- 
'ihcr  to'  (X)ject,  nor  (at  least,  at  present)  anything  to  add. 
The  nei/tstepcarries us  into  Scripture, and  there  A^e  g^t ttp^ 
more  sSiisfactory  as  well  as  more  familiar  ground. 

In  the  Septuagint  the  word  aio7i  is  used  as  the  constant 
oquiValent  of  olam    (D^il?),  and  it  is  easy  to  ascertain  the 
meabing  of  it  therefore  at  the*  time   this   translation  was 
made.     Olavi  is  not  the  life  of  a  man,  and  the  Homeric  sig- 
icance  of  nion  is  not  found.     Olam  is  undoubtedly  more 
H ten  Used  for  a  limited  time  than  for  eternity.     We  have  ' 
^een  indeed  that  the  Old  Testament  in  general  gives  us  only 
the  shadows  of  what  are  eternal  things.     And  the  shadows 
are  necessarily  transient  and  to  pass  away.     Yet  to  these 
the  term  is  constantly  applied.     The  covenant  with  Noah 
is  a  covenant  of  olam  /and  not  less  so  the  Mosaic  statutes 
arid  ordinances,  ^ij^h^ugh  these  plainly  were  to  pass  away. 
So  also  even  the  Vmln  of^oW"  arc  "men  of  olam'  ;  "the 
(mcient  landmark"  is  thfe   "landmark  oi  9lamV;    Israel^ 
yoke  had'  been  "broken  from  olam^'  an*  so  repeatedly,* 
Now  in  noTie  of  these  cases  do  we  find  a  parallel  to  the  lim- 
itations which  the  P.atl»r£JiCih''n.^'8  ^  "^  languages  imposes 
;n  the  terT^iNfe  Sp^M^ii^^^  X^t  leave    it  its  full  signi- 
'  r  flounce  ^^^tSEre.     1^  .|pci^^^^ 
which«  beten  t^m 'a%<i^  as  inthe  natui^  of  thliigs  it 
coukl ;  S  so  as  to,  tic  rest.    A#  *h  ^^pjes  jp  nunier-  s« 
'  -fts.    By  no  process  of  fair  dealing  then  ,cat0tawi(oi^«o;i1n^^ 
.  'Is  u^inthe  Septuagint)  be  saidjede8saril)^4m6a^^  T 

But'again,  it  iaused  inthe^ural,  wme  we  can  sca^celjr 

translate  it  otherwise  than  by  "  age#^ :  ^sM^vii.-5,  "  th^.^ 
years  of  (^;f^ij||^2f^  ;^afe/Hhe  m^mk'!^'*^%^^ 

•T5en7^r1^#i||HH    2i=?n  JeV.  u/20.  ';'lt  Is'fSu^ft  "  old  "  or 
"of  old"  or  'Mn\||*lAe,"  in  Deut.  xXxiuT  ;  Josll,  xxiv. "^jvJob.  xxii. 


%  V 


1 


16;  Prov.  xxiuU<i;  ilccV  i.  ip  ;'lsa.  )dvi.  9;  ;ivH.  U  ;  Ivi!^ 


*  5  **%9»' 


fc,^ 


1% 


.-*.. 


•vV' 


!  ■  V 


-.v- 


'    =«?• 


'  I 


."\"^ 


258        FACTS  .AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURii  ST ATK. 

"the  generations  of  old"  are   the  " generations  of  ages." 
^  Here  the  same  remarks  as  before,  and  not  less  forcibly,  ap- 
ply-        ,  '  '  r 
Moreover,  there  is   in  the  Old  Testament  a  way  of  ex- 

pressmg  absolute  eternity,  which  seems  fully  to  recognize 
the  inadequacy  of  t>/«;n  definitely  to  express  it  by  itself 
This  is  by  the  addition  to  it  of  a  word  which  may  be  taken 
as  "and  yet"  :  "  for  the  olam  ^?  !/<("*  showing  that  be- 
yond  the  oteM  there  is  a  conception  of  time  possible  and 
actual.  This  phrase  occurs  Home  fourteen  times  ih  the  Old 
Testament,  aiid  in  one  instance  only  it  may  have  a  more 
\  limited  meaning,  Psa.  civ.  5,  and  here  really  limited  by  tbe 
\  nature  of  that  to  which  it  is  applied.f        •      •* 

This  then  gives  us  the  sense  (so  far  as  the  Septuagint 
.ffoes)  of  botir;eon  and  :eonial:  for  *'ieonial"  is  the  word 
'they  use  in  such  cases  as  those  where  in  Hebrew  v^ld  be 
found  the  noun  ohm  with  a  governhig  preposifTon.  A 
*' covenant  of  olam  "  becomes  thus  an  "  leonial  covenant," 
and  the  "landmark  of  olam,''  the  *  :eonial  landmark."  No 
one  can  avoid  the  conclusion,  as  it  would  seem,  that  olam 
and  leon  in  the  Septuagint,  may  very  properly.be  taken^to 
mean  "age,"  and  that  iconial  in  the  same  way  nfeans  "be- 
longing to  the  age,  or  ages."      ,  /  '  y    • 

*  Dr  Tayler  L»'\vis  speaks  of  it  thus  in  Lance's  Ecclesiastes  :  Ad  "  is 
.       tmn,nHoa' tr>,  urnml,ana  <;oincr  h.^yond-^  passing  beyoi.Otill  fur- 
'      tlier  on   and'ofi.     Tl.us   it   becomes  a  name  for  eternity.  a4|ni  thpse 
remarkable  expressions.  Isa.  ix.  5.  nU  ad,  poorly  rendered  '  ev|rla%t.ng 
Eatl.er,'and«/.(.c/a/.  .nh  '  inhabiting  eterniiy.Msa.  Ivii.  lo  ;  vvf  mvh.ch 
compare  Hab.  iii.  G.  Gon.  xlix.  26.  and  Isa.  xlv.17.  where  we |^vfe  the 
same  word  as  noun  and  ireposition-the  mountains  of  ad,  the  progeni- 
tors of  ad-to  the  «ges  of  ad  :  to  the  ages  to  which  other  ages  are  to  be 
added  indefinitely.     Hence,  thc^  preposition  sense  to,  nftkmg  it  «igniti- 
cantlv  aswQllasetvmolo<iically..<iuivalenttotheLatin«rfc<,theOreek 
4'rf  Saxonr»<andfo.in  all  which  tficM-e  is  this  senseof  arrival  and  transi- 
Lion'.     The   idoa  becn.os   most  vivid  and   impressiv..   in   this   Hehrev 

phrase,  nyi  D^iy^j  ■  f"'"<'^'f''"  =""^  >■'"'•"' 

"pShe  other  passages  are:-Exod.  xv.  18.  Psa.  x.  IC,  xxi.  4.  xlv.  6 
^•ii   It.lii.H.  cxix    11.. -xlv.  1.2.  ::l.l)aM.  xii.  :},  Mic.  iv  5., 


u- 


THE    \0E8  OF   ETERNITY. 


259 


Here  Dr'.  Beecher  stops  short  in  his'&iquiry,  and  does  not 
follow  it  into  the  Now  Testament.     Nor  does  he  sufticicnlly 
recognize  thu  fact,  that  niUr  all  tlurtv  aro  passages  in  which, 
olanT  can  scariH-ly  si  and   for  lesM  tlian   oternity,   £lnd  that 
atojy  is  therefolvB   alrej^dy  used   in    tlu'  St  ptuagint  in  this 
way.*     His  cxaminatiSn/is  imperfect,  and  his  statement  par- 
tial.    The  former  lid^d^s  not  carry  far  enough  to  decide 
the  question,  and  yet  leaves  the  full  force  of  what  he  has 
brought  forward  to  bear  Vpon  the  decision  of  the  meaning 
of  the  word  as  used  by  the  Lord  as  to  the  condemnation  ;Of 
the  wicked  hereafter.     This  is  scarcely  candid.     It  is  true 
he  warns  us  at  the  beginning  that  he  do*es  not  propose  to 
discuss  this  question  of  eternal  retribution,  ^;it  he  does  un- 
avoidably produce  ail  impression  by  thepartial  investigatioij 
he;  has  made.     Nay,  he.  would  actually  settle  thepointM  far 
'^  as  concerns  the  meaning  of  the  words  "  eternal  •'punishment^ 
and   "everlastmg"  fire.     We  may  fairly  demand   of  him, 
why  he  has  omitted  what   is  absolutely  necessary,  to  the 
mere  philological  inquiry  even  V  and  why  the  question  of 
these  words  should  bje' more  difficult  to  settle  in  the  New 
Testament  thaii  it  is  in  the  Old?     Nor  only  so,  but  as  he 
has  shown  us  that  the  word  aion  did  get  to  mean  "  eternity," 
and  was  used  for  it  by  Plato  and  others  before  the  time  of 
our  Lord,  it  was  surely  above  all  necessary  to  see  whether 
the  New  Testament  might  not  use  the  woi'd  in  some  similar 

way.  '  . 

Dr.  Beecher, J^ever,  has  not  done  this,  and  from  this 
point  we  mus<jj^pn  without  him.  We  have  presented  the 
ajcuments  and*conclusions  to  which  4ie  and  others  have 
'"^e,  fullyy.  and  (we  think)  impartially.  We  shalj  seek  the 
final  solution  iw>v  wherp  only  we  can  find  it,  and  where 'he 
has  not  ventu^te  yct.^         ^  .    ^^^  ^  - 

VPjkTii'  22 ;  ail*!  see  Dent. 
"  cxv.  l3/etc. 


% 


'^^w 


*  The  very  first  uxeof  both  ahlirws  this 
xxxii.  40;  Psa.  ix..  7  ;  xxxiii.'U  ;  xc.  2;  xcii.  8 


L# 


■**  ■..5j'';i 


/  ■ 


'   i0f 


%£" 


r 


260        EAUTS  AKD  THBOttliW  AS  TO  A  FUTUBfi  STAtB. 


ii*v  .^■.. 


CHAPTER  XXVII.        -  r  ^ 

EW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OP  THE  QUESTION. 

I|f^1i«  NewVestament  we  find  aian  over  and  over  again 
tralislated  "world,'  and   not   badly,  if  we  only  think  of 
woVlds  in  tim^nstead  of  worlds  in  space,  but  more  intelli- 
gible to  UB  il,Y«ndered  "  age."     T>ie  "end  of  the  ,oorklj^n 
Matt,  xiii.,  xxiv.,  x.'^viii.  20  is  thus  in  all  these  places  l^e  ., 
coranletion  of;|^he  age."    In  Heb.  ix.  26,  it  is  "-the  comple- 
tio^Wthe  {igei'*r;^Ko  we  have  "  this  world"  and  "the  world 
to  come,"  "the  children  of  this  World,"  "the  princes  of  this 
world,"  and  similar   ei^tiressi^ns  frequently.     So  again  ^ 
have  "  ages  to  pome,"  aV  wft*  M^-e  ages  c|pipleted,  and  can 
look  back  to  a  tim&bcforfealiesejaje^  began.* 
*   ,  Thus  Scripture  ^^ry  Were  r^gnizes  the  fact  of  these 
successive  ages,  sorely  not  purposeless  divisions  of  time,  but 

*  eacjted  step  in  the  a^i8g|)lishment^f  .di\finQ|pun8el8.     We 
liave  in  fact  the  very»exi)re8si(inpnd  t^J  it  we  sffall  have  ^ 

'   i^n  to  return,  "the  purpose  of  tM«i«s ''*  (^I^iiki^). 

t%  ages,  then,  are  dispensatAal  priorts,  whqse  e^stence 

ami  character  are  not  ,UnimpapPit  Aings^for  the  student  of 

the  %ays^f  Him  whfese"  goi^form  have  beeiT  from  of  old, 

Iplm  everlasting."  c|[t  is  to  tlve  "  King  of  (these)  ages  "  that 

,^^e  apostle  therefore  ascribes   "glory  unto   the  ages  of 
%ges"  (1  Tim.  i.  17).     Him  they  all , serve  in  various  har- 
mony of  the  one  everlasting  anthem  wherewith  all  His  works 
praise  Him  their  jVIaker.  »      V  ' 

,  Eternity  in  Scripture  we  (  need  hot  wonder  to  find  ex- 
pressed in  terms  of  these  divinely  constituted  "  ages."  This 
is  done  up  a  number  of  different  ways,  hidden  Very  much  in 
our  version  by  vague  and  dissimilar  phraseology,  which  ha» 


little  of  the  beauty  and  appropriatonestl  ol  the  inspired  orig 

*  Matt.  xii.  32,  Luke  xviii.  30,  xx.  34, 1  Cor.  ii.  6,  Epli»  ii.  7,  Col.  ^ 
r  26,  1  Cor.  ii.  7  (before  the  fif/en).  .  g,     '  , ,  ^ 


50  again  -v^ 
ted,  and  can 


:pb»  ii.  7,  Col.  ^ 


--^^W''. 


'< 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OF  THE  QUESTION.        261 

inal.  Tbe  word  aion  is  used  nearly  eighty  times  in  this  way 
iu  the  New  Testament,  and  above  seventy  times  the  word 
Monios.  We  l»ave  thus  nearly  a  hun.lred  and  fifty  occurrences 
to  test  the  Scripture  use  of  these  expressions.  Surely  we 
should  be  able  to  arrive  at  son^atisfactory  result. 

Let  us  first  look  at  the  pastWges.  Of  course  from  our 
poiltt'of  view  in  time  we  can  look  at  eternity  as  behind  or 
before  us.  It  is  but  one  and  the  same  eternity,  of  course ; 
for  there  cannot  mthe  nature  of  things  be  two  :  but  to  our 

•  4K)nception  there  is  a  past  and  a  future  one.     Let  us  gather 
ufthe  expressions^  of  t)ie  former  first. 

•  at  find  tien  that  there  are  "ages  "in  the  "ends  "of 
^  whSiJ^e  art?v:  for  we  read  that  ''all  these  things  happened 

unto^m  for  types,  and  are  written  for  our  admonition 
upon  who^gie  ends  of  the  world  (literally,  the  ages)  are- 
come  "  (1  m'  X.  11).     We  may  surely  connect  that  with 
the  passage  t>efori  cited  from  Hebrews  (ix.  26),  that  "once 
at  the  completion  of  the  ages  hath  (Christ)  appeared,  to  put 
away  sin  by'Jthe  sacrifice  of  Himsel£"     These  ages,  were  the 
preparatory  times  of  which  we  have  been  already  thijg^jig, 
when  God  by  the  ministry  of  condemnation  and  i- 
ways  was  shutting  man  up  to  the  grace  which  Chris    ^ 
show.     Thus  "  when  we  were  yet  without  strength  i?i-  due 
^/meChriBfr^ied  for  the  ungodly."    This  grace  lay  .under 
the  veil  thro^i^hout  these  ages— there,  but  lacking  full  ex- 
pression.    Tl^e  "ends  of  the  ages  "  having  come,  that  ex- 
pression has  been  found;  and  thus  the  "  types  "  of  Israel's 
history,  as  well  as  the  shadows  of  the  law  in  a  stricter  sense, 
cfive  to  us  their  full  weight  of  "admonition."  § 

^  In  Col.  i.  26  again,  we  hear  of  a  mystery  hidden  "from 
ages  and  from  generations,"  and  in  Eph.  iii.  9  find  a  similar 
expression.    There  need  be  no  doubt  that  here  we  have  thfe 

•  '  self-same  ages  as  before.    Nor  again,  when  Paul  speaks  of 

hidden  wisdom  "ordained  before  the  ages,  to  our  glory" 

(1  Cor.  ii.  7). —^ 

These  ages  th||p  are  plainly  finite,  and  so  is  the  whole 
course  of  them-  kit   w%have  two  other  expressions  which 


f^v-v;-- 


^!^'*i!'*fi^*9>lliiPV>* 


262         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

aro  different  irom  these.  In  them  aion  is  used  in  the  sin- 
gular, and  in  one  passage  at  least  eternity  must  be  meant. 
"  Known  unto  God  are  all  His  works  from  aion  "  (Acts  xv. 
18)^  where  we  cannot  say  "from  the  age."  In  the  other 
passages  the  expression  may  seem  less  decisive :  God  has 
"  spoken  by  the  mouth  of  His  holy  prophets,  whicli  have 
been  from  aion  "  ;  and  similarly,  "  by  the  mouth  of  His  holy 
prophets  from  aion"  (Luke  i.  70;  Acts  iii.  21);  but  in 
neither  case  would  *'  the  age  "  do  at  all.  What  age  V  "  From 
the  beginning  of  the  world"  might  suit  the  context,  but 
would  be  no  translation  :  and  outside  that  beginning  of  the 
world  is  what  ?  Surely,  eternity.  In  this  sense  then  "  from 
eternity "  would  suit,  and  all  the  occurrences  would  bQ  in 
harmony. 

Once  more  a  similar  phrase  occurs  in  the  words  of  the 
man  to  whom  the  Lord  gave  sight  (John  ix"  32) :  "^  From 
the  alfmwsLS  it  not  heard  that  any  man  opened  the  eyes  of 
the  blind,"  and  here  again  the  meaning  is  simply  "it  never 
was  heard."  Thus  wherever  aion  is  used  in  these  expres- 
sions it  cannot  be  spoken  of  a  particular  age  or  dispensation', 
but  seems  invariably  to  imply  eternity. 

This  is  all  we  have  relating  to  the  past.  As  regards  the 
future  we  have  more  and  various  phrases,  whidi  we  may 
here  again  classify  accordingly  as  aion  is  used  }tn  the  singu- 
lar or  in  the  plural.  The  plural  form  we  shall  look  at  first 
as  being  the  most  simple.  We  .have  here  three  expi-es- 
sions: —   .  ■  ^  ^■"■■- 

1.  Simplest  of  all,  in  Jude  25,  glory  is  ascribed  to  God  . 
"  both  now  and  to  all  the  ar/es."    There  is  plainly  no"  reason 
to  limit  this.  "^  ,  \  ;.  " 

2.  More  often  we  have,  and  less  fully,  "onto  the  ages'." 
This  occurs/eighf  times.  Six  times  in  ascriptions.df  praise 
to  God  or  to  Christ  (Matt.  vi.  13;'Roni.i.  25;  ix.  5;  xi. 
36 ;  xvi.  27  ;  2  Cor,  xi.  31) ;  onc6  the^  \a  the  statement  Mr. 
Jukes  relies  on,  and  as  to  the  fprce  of  which  we  shall  pres- 
ently inquire,—"  Jesus  Chi|p,  the  ^nie  yesterday,  to-day, 
and  to  the  ages  "  (Heb,  jtiii.  ^\ :  {\rid  once  it  is  said  of  Christ, 


'fe;' 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OP  THE  QUESTIOIT. 


268 


that"  He  shall  reign  over  the  house  of  Jacob  unto  the  ages  "      | 
Luke  i.  33).    In  none  of  these  passages  is  there  reason  to      | 
nuestion  that  a  proper  eternity  is  intended.  _        -  ^ .     ^i^ 
S  The   third  expression   is  a  reduphcative  form  which 
plainly  conveys.a  much  greater  impression  of  ^^^^^^'^y- 
Lto  the  ages  of  ages>     And  this  is  five  time's  applied  to  the 
life  of  God  Himself:   //.  "  ILveth  unto  the  ages  of  ages 
'(Rev.  iv.9,10;  v.  14;  x.  G:  xv.7);  once  to  the  rcsurrec- 
ion-life  of  Christ  (Rev.  i.  18) ;  once  to  the  kingdom  of    our  ^ 
Lord  and   His  Christ"  (#ev.  xi.  15) ;  once  to  the  re rgn  of 
the  saints  (ch.  xxii.  5) ;  ten  times  in  ascriptions  of  glory  to 
God  (Gal.  i.  5;   Phil,  iv:  20;  1  Tim  i.  ^l  \  ^  \^' ^^y 
H^b.  xiii.  21;  \  Pet.  iy.  11;  v.  11;  Kev.i.O;  v.    3;  vu. 
12)  •  twice  to  the  tormetit  of  the  wicked  (Rev.  xiv.  U ;  xx. 
10)-  and  once  to  the  smoke  of  Babylon  rising  up  forever 
(ch  xix.  3).    These  last  passages  we  shall  have  again  before 
L,  but  if  the  duration  of  these  ages  is  the  measure  of  the 
Ln  life  of  Christ,  ye^  of  God  Himself;  surely  its  f^rce  can- 

not  be  questioned.  :  '  -xi.  ^u^ 

•  In  all  these  cases  the  plural  form  impresses  us  with  the 
sense  of  vastness  and  immensity.  Inthe  c^xeswc Lave  now 
to  consi.ler  the  use  of  the  singular  conveys  the  idea,  of  course, 
of  unity.     Here  again  we.  haje  various  expressionB.-    ^^^ 

1.  A  very  singular  o^/%  a'o"  "^  *^  "'""j"  """^^'^  " 
is  the  duration  of  the  rel.Vf<*e  Son  of  God :  "Thy  throne, 
O  God,Ms  for  the  aion  of  the '^lon "  (Heb.  1.8),  where  we 
havetheSeptuagintrcnderingoftheexpressionheforeno^^^ 

as  the  Hehrew  on>  for  proper  eternity  aV\  Di.l»,  o?«« 
«„«?).  Here  then  it  does  seem  that  aion  (nust  even  m  tne 
Septnagtat*  have  this  later  but  acknowledged  sense.  I  lato 
has  it  It  is  owned;  and  Philo  also  »»  f -""""f^V^T' 

■  from  the  verybirth-Blaccof  the  Septu^mt  although  of  a 
somewhat  later  date. "  Here  .he  expression  .s  used  for  e^e^ 
nity.ana  we  can  only  translalo  "for  ^^-^if^-^^^^ 

•    eou^a*)  of  eternity."    -We  have  seu.  a  similar,  use  of  a.on 


J- 


for  the  past  (Acts  xv.  18). 


^ 7^^""~'  Tl«  v>ji  ii"  "  "  accord'm?  to  the  course  o|  tUis 

\varUl.'  '.  \  .  ■,  ; 


/' 


MX 


if' 


i 


, 


"*  ^ 


1  „ 


■i^-' 


264*        FACT9  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.  * 

2.  AgainV  we  have  an  ascripiiQn  of  glory  to  Christ,."  for 
the  day  of  ^e>mty  "  (aion)'  (2  Pet.  iii.  18).  Here  onee'more 
a  limited  meatving  can  scarce  be  contended  for.  -      , 

3v  Again,  in'Ki>lv,  iii.  21,  we  find,,"  Unto  Him  be  glory  in 
the  church  by»  Christ  Jesus  i«<<o  rt//  the  (jeneratiom  of  th^- 
(((je  of  the  «//t'.s."     liere  no  one,  I  suppose,  \vould  <^ubt , 
A    eternity  to  be  meant.     It  mai/  define  what  "  age''"  is  meant 
when  aion  is  used  alone  :  it  is,  the  ' '  agd ' '  of  the  ages,  the  age 
in  which  all  ages  are  summed  up.     ."     -.  J      ' .' 

4.  But  the  most  commQu  expression  of  all  is  that  for  which 
no'm«;-e  suited  rendering  can  be  fouml  than  "  forever  "— 
for  jthe  ^iori,  '  It  is  used  twenty-height  times ;  ftiKl  not  in  ^ 
single  instance  can  it  be  proved  to  have  a  limited  sente. 
It  too  is  6sed  for  the  duration  of' the  life  of  Christ  (Jolrtixii. 
34)  I  of  the  abiding  of  the  Spirit  of  Go<l  witlrMlis  people 
(xiv.  16) ;  of  Christ's"  priesthood  |IIeb.  vil.) ;.  the  enduring 
of  tlie  wor^  of  God  (1  Pet.  i.' 23),  ami  of  the  doer  of  His 
will-(4  John  ii.  17);  and  of  the  believer's  righteousness 
(2  Gor.  ix.  9).  It  is  used'  too"  for  the  duration  of  the  portion 
of  the  ungodly,  "blackness, of -darkness  forever"  (Jude  13. 

.   .2r^t.ii.  17).        ;         .   '      ■  ,  "■  ^i^: 

"  Amid  all  this  varied  phraseology  not  one  passage  ;f  an  be 
shown  where  our  common  translation  gives  some  equivalent 

,  of  •'  forever,"  in  which  less  than  eternity  can  be  proved  'to  1  )e, 
meant.  i'Mr.  Clemance  has  hideed  said :  «  An  ^on  may  have 
an  end.  .  iEons  of  aeons  may  have  an  end.  Only  that  which 
lasts  through  all  the  leons  is  without  an  end,  arid  J5cri|i^ure 
affirms* this  only  of  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  of  the  glory  of 

^God  in  tho^urch."*  Canon  Farrar  quotes  .this  with  appro- 
bation; bPhe'has'not  Mtempted  tQ  produce  a^ingle'New 

'  Testament  passage  tliat  I  can  iji^l,  to  prove  the  ^i>|rt^t^  p,f 
,  my  assertion  here.     Instead  of  this,  he  goes  to^t^^l  ^^^'^-^ 
tament  for  his  jjroqf,  and  of  coui'Se  quotes  o//f™fetu?^ 

'    ^ionj     This'amounts  to  a  confession  thai':  the.  X c^JpstarnQnt 

^'  wdl  not  s^rve  his  purpose.  Wo'uld  he  not  liaV^roduced. 
its  testimony,  if  he  could  ?  , 

■•  •     .*  FntnrpPiifiishment.p.  86.  quoted  in' tlip  pn4fi(r«  to  Ktenuil  llopf 

■,,        •  *   .'  ■'■   ..  .  ,: 


M 


^4 


v';ri 


■'.^c--i 


w 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OF  THE  QUESTION.        265 

•  ■        - 

Dr.  Bfeecher,  too,  as  we  have  seen,  avoids  tlie  New  Testa- 
ment. -  Mr.  Oxenham  in^  his  letter  has  nothing  to  say 
concerning  these  expressions.  '  Mr.  Jukes,  however,*^  comes 
boldly  forward,  as  we  have  seen,  with  a  distinct^istatenffent 
as  to  the  nature  and  duration  of' these  ages  to  come.  STohis 
views,  therefore,^  we  must  direct  our  attention.  p 

The  substance  of  therti  we  have  given  before  in  his  own 

)i(rords.    The  ages,  he  believes,  are  periods  in  whicU  God  is 

working  in  grace  to  meet  and  correct  the  ^ifect  of  the  fall. 

\l\s  rest  is  beyond"yiem,.not  in  them,  when  the  mediatorial 

kingdom  of  Christ,  which  is  for  the,ages  of  ages,  is  given.up, 

••\nd  Christ,  the  AVorker  of  the  divhie  pui^pose  in  them,  goes 

back  to  the  glory  which  lie  had  before  the  age-times,  that 

I*.  God  may  be  all  in  all.     Throughout  these  ages  Christ  is 

}..&,  Saviour  needed  and  found,  as  much  as  "  yesterday"  and 

'Nov  we  have  seen  that  over  and  over  again  it  is  asserted 
[^^  God,  that  He  ''  livet^i  for  Ahe  ages  of,  the  ages,"  and  8c( 

,  of  Christ  as  risen  from  the  dead.  Will  Mr.  Jukes  say 
..  .jt  His  "  behohVI  am  alive  for  the  ages  oY  ages"  is  not 
meatit  to  convey  the  thought  of  the  Englisft  version,  "  I  am 
alive  for  evcnnore'''  Y  or  that  "God,  who  liveth  for  the  ages 
of  at^es"  means  "  God  who  liveth  for  the  time  during  whioji 
He  is  showing;  grace     ?  ;    - 

Ao-ain,^  glory  is  over  janH  over  again  ascribed  to  God  for 
the  ages  ofi^ges  or  the  age  of  ages,  and  not  once  (accorclmg 
to  tMs  view  jpf  the  mattar)  fot  a  proper  feternity  at  all ! 
How.  bey oW  measure  strangfe  that  there  should  be.no 
glimpse  beyond  ihese  ages,-  durhig  whic^j,  the  smokp  of  tor- 
m'ent.  never  cca.ses !  How  strange  that  just  when  that  long, 
linf^ering  purgation  shall  have  come  to  an  end, — when  praise 
should  be  most  rapturous^  and  joy  complete*— thlit  jlisf  then 
&4^"hl  come  to  the  end  of  ^11  that  Scripture  conteip- 
^Ijttes  df  joy  or  praise,,  or  the  very  litg  of  God  Himself,  and 

B.  a  note  be  heard,  not,  a  raf  of  gljpry  shine  out  of  the 


.«> 


9 


r; 


si  ■ 

J- 


tentnl  IIoi)P.        ,\\A 
«  ■    ,  I 


«» 


■.   -J^. 


*^jMliMr.  Cox,"  Salvalor  Mundi,"  ch.  v.^vi. 


m 


^" 


,   -  -A  .  -' 


A 


\«. 


■\ 


'-ffl 

' . 

1Mb 

■  V' 

i^H 

i .  i  . 

■1          . , 

'■ 

'">■ 

1 

h.  I- 

FACTS  ANI>  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTirRE  STATE. 


impenetrable   eternity  beyond!      Who   can  believe  this? 
Who  can  seriously  claim  it  as  a  thing  to  be  believed  V 

But  we  are  told  tliat  Scripture  itself  thus  speaks  of  the 
"purpose  of  the  ages."*  The  phrase  occurs,  Eph.  iii.  11,  as 
the  Greek  of  what  in  our,  version  is  >i  eternal  purpose."  But 
.what  is  this  purpose,  j^s  Scripture,  nc^t  the  .Restitutionist,  de- 
clares it  ?  Is  ii  not,  so  far  as  given  in  the  passage  produced, 
"  the  intent  that  now  unto  the  princiiJ^lities  and  p^wefs^  in 
heavenly  places  itiight  be  known  by  the  churoh  the  manifold* 
^wisdopi  .of  God,' according  to  the  purpose  of  the  ages"? 
'There  is  no  mention  heft  of  other  beings  than  the  angels  and 
the  church;  the  lime  for  the  \yisdom  of  God  to  Ue  thus 
made  known  is  "  now."  -Can  Mr^ 'Jiffccs  show  how  this  • 
speaks  9f  the  recovery  to  God  of  those  in  a,n  after-time 
cast  into  hell  V  *  If  he  can,  at  least  he  has  not  dc^ne  it.  . 

But  thai '*  Christ's  mediatorial  kingdom  is  for  the  ages 
of  a'^es,  and  after  these  are  finished,  He  delivers  it  up."     Let 
.  us  see  what  is  the  truttTpf  this.         |  -  ^ 

Now  sitting  upog,,the  Father's  throne  as  Son  of  God^  and 
Mvmg  "all  authoia^y  in  heaven  and  earth,"  lie  comes  as 
Son  of/tidn  m  glory  to  take  Jlis  own  .throne  as  such  *"     It  . 
is  plainly  this  kingdom  which  He  delivers  up  to  the  Father 
(according  to  1  Cor.  xv.  24-28),  having  accomplished  the 
puri»ose  for  ,which  He  took  it.  .  He  reigns,  says  the  apostle — 
.until  wliei\V    "Till  He  liath^>w«  all  eiionks  under  Ilis  feet."  ' 
Is  tbat  conversion  ?     If  it  is,  words  have  nO  meaning.     No  ; 
it   is   the    sul)jecting  ^by  po^yer   tho.se  who  could   not   '^e\ 
subdued  'by  grace.     Death    i^  among   these    enemies,  and 
'•  death,    the    last   onemvy    shall   be   destroyed.''      AVheri.  V 
Wlien  death  and  hell  (hades),  having  delivered  up  jLheir  dead, 


*  So  also  Cox  (Salv.  Miin.,  p.  107) :  '.'  In  liis  epistle  to  tlio"Kplie.sians 
fie  both  e.vpres.sly  njun;';)»  God's  deUsrini^iation  to  save  men  by  Christ 
\aU  riien  1]  '  tlu;  purj^ose  of  the.  <ifj<>t,'  tlie  etid  tlj^  was  to  bo  wrought 
out  tlirough  all  the  successions  .'of  'time ;  and  mst(W|<>ly  asserts  tliat 
this  redeemin^j  w.ork  will  take  ages  for  its  accomplishment./^'  Ages  to 
come  f     Where  1     '  ^  .  *' 

•J-Comp.  Rev.  ill.  21i  Dan.  vii.  l3  ;  Matt.  xxv.  31,"  etc.       , 


v!i 


t^ 


\ 


■,  -i^'  ■ 


v6,  • 

■  ■'..■II 

■■  VIV 


^■'    NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OP  THE  QUESTION.        2&1 

shall  be 'cast  into  the  lake  of  fire.     When  Gehenna  shall 
swallow   lip  hades,  and  the  second   death  |)ut  an  end  to 
the  first  (see  Uev.  xx.  13,  14»).   'Then  will  the  last  enemy 
be  destroyed,  and  all  be  under  the  iee^  of  Christ.     Then,  ^ 
therefore,  will  be  the  time  when  QhristVill  deliver  up  the  • 
kingdoiji  to  ihe  Father.  * 

But  the  ages  of -hges  s'treteh  on  beyond  this :  for  the  tor- 
.  ment  for  the' ages  of  ages  in  the  lake  of  fire  begins  even'for 
the  devil  himself  bdt  at  tlie  close  of  the  millennial  reign 
(R,ev.  XX.  10).  The  kingdom  which  Christ  takes  to  piit  • 
down  all  enemie;B  will  be  over.  Dieath,  tke  last  enemy,  will 
be  destroyed.  But  the  ages  of  agtes  roll  on  their  unbroken 
coursJ^and  Christ's'  ''reign  for  the  ages  of  ages  "  will  of  ^ 
.  coiirse^o  on  also.  -        *  - 

^  It  is„a  very  common  mistake  Mr.  Jiikes  has  made,  but  it 
becomeljpa  very  serious  one  when  made  the  foundation;  of  a 
doctrine  sucli  as  his.  ^-He  has  confounded  the  brief  millennial 
reign  in  which  Christ"  by  power  puts  do#n  His  enemies 
with  the  everlasting  reign,  of  ChAst  as  So^^^pon  t^^e  Father's 
throne,  which  never  '  can  be  given  Up.  For  Mt||  lU  reigns 
now  before  that  kingdom  is  come.  ^^\Jlt^B0hntY  i&  ills' 
in  heave9  and  6arth.  It.  will  notjcJeasp^  %be  Pis  when  that 
coming  :kingdom  shaU  be  deUy^e<|;:^i)  to  th(?  Fajher,.that 

God  may  be  all  in  alU       '  \i^5  ^       -K  '^^'^ 

•  And  that  coming-  rule,  will  It  to^ifest  is  IVl^.  jukesv^ould 
intimate,  a  grace  beyond  the  pre8eii$--at'  least  more  prevail- 
ing grace  than  now '?  On  the  contraf y,  it  is  the  rule  of  "  THE 
RO©°OF  IKON,"*  and  the  effect  as  to  His  enemies;  not  their 
Ijeiiig  won  by  the  grace  of  the  gospel,  but  "  dashed  inpieq^ 
likp  a  potter's  vessel."  ''  •    ^*  *' 

•;.     ?^oV  in' Rev.  xi.  15",  to  which  Mr.  Juk^i'^fe  it  iS  indeed. 

>said,  "TheMJor^fZ-kingdomp/our  Lord  and  of  His  Christ  has 

'^ome,"  and  this  dqesof  couf  se  re^  to  the  setting  up  of  what 

is  catted  the  millennial  l^^dom  j  but  it  is  looked  at|iB  a  very 

intelligible  way)  as  the  setting  up  of  an  authority  S^s^ich  wpl 

jiever  cease,  aV?/"//?<?  kingdom, "  the  kingdom  ofonrXqrd,  and 


*■  ;,v; 


*  Psa.  ii,  8,5) ;  Rev.  il.  26,  2|. 


^■st- 


•* 


^ 


.J 


.  I 


/    "; 


<^^ 


%  268         *'ACTS  AND  THEOIIIES  AS  TO  A  PUTlTllK  STATE.         "     ,. 

of  His  Christ,"  and  so,  when  it  is  added,  "  ftnd  He  shall  reign 

for  the„!?%es  of  ages,'  this  does  not  affect  the  truth  that-  the 

.  m^te  human  form  of  the  kingdom  will  be  given  up.     "  He 

shci^  feign  forever  aiid  ever."'     Though  He  leave  the  human 

:  t^hlrBie  to  sit  upon  the  divine,  still  "He  shall  reign."     It  is 

'  the  everlasting  prean  rightly  then  begun. 

Certain  it  is  that  if  as  man  He  reign  till  all  enemies  "be 
under  His  feet,  and  then  deliver  up  the  kingdom"  t^,o  the 
Father,  and  if  death  be  the  last  enemy  destroyed,— rA<?7i  the 
ages  of  ages  of  tormejit  begin  for  most  from  thlf^  point^^in^ 
stead  of  ending  here.  And  Christ's  reign  for  the  ages  OjT 
ages  cannot  end  here  eij^her.  •    " 

— ^ — r— Thus  Mr.  Jukes'  fbimdation  is  swept  away      Another  text 


//       V 


#• 


upon  which  he  relies,  there  is  not  even  so  plausible  an  excuse 
for  misinterpreting.  For  when  the  apostle  speaks  of ''  Jesus 
Christ,  the  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  the  ages  '*  <Heb. 
'  xiii.  8),  he  is  certainly  cortnecting  this  eittW'r  with  the  faith 
of  the  Christian  leaders,*  of  which  he  ha«.  spoken  •  in  the 
verse  before,  or  with  the  "  divers  and  strange  doctrines  "  of 
the  verse  after,  or  with  both.  He  is  either  showing  the  uu- 
changeableness  of  Christ,  as  ansWering  the  confidence  of 
■  His  disciples'  fajth,  Or  else  that  He  is  ever  the  same,  to 
'  rebuke  the  divers  and  strange  doctrines.  In  either  case, 
therp  is  no  question  of  His  being  the  Savi<»ur'of  those  who 
have  rejected  His  salvation;  and  to  ft^a^mtfitf!,  ilie  name  by 
which  His  people  know  Him.  in;  order  to  imiist  upoii  His 
being  an  Anointed  Saviour  to  those  who  on  the  contrary  t^ 
fuse  and  reject  His  salvation,^— is  nothing  less  than  bold  per- 
version of  a  l)lessed  truth. 

Mr.  Jukes'  views  ort  this  point  need  not  then  detaifi  ijf 
•longer.     But  we  have   yet  to  consider   tl»e  word  qu}nm 
,    '^♦aeonial,'  or  eternal.  n  v    ' 

Anti  it  is  here  that  we  find. the  fnJTphalanv  -of  opposition 
to  the  commonly  accepted  meaning  of  the  te^me.  Canon 
FarrsAand  Mr.  Oxenham  ho  re  make  their  stand,  not  per'- 
c^iong  thai  the  battle  is  already  gone  against  ihem  irreeov 


'llT 


v^^^^1^i^l7:'i:.\-.s  1-'  '.       -.;  "'■.Jit-^4 


>  •-, 


^      / 


-/ 


IJEW  TIStAMENJEHOLUTlON  Ot  Tltfe^ESTION.      '  9QQ 

*  f      ,'  '  '  ■  .  "  n-,    ■ 

erably.  Messrs.  Minton,  Roberts,  and  others,  their  oppo- 
nents indoctriM-,  coincide  with  them.  But  an  answer  to 
«n«' will  be  J^t  tlic  same  tlrtic  an  aBStrer  fe  ail  the  f^^^^^^ 

Aiotum,  as  derived  from  «««^*,-.Gf  eou^e  gets  its  meaning 
from  this^so.  We  have  seen  that  aiow  has  two  meanings 
in  the'$f.W  Testament;  one,  that  of  "  age  "  or  dispensation, 
ttie  otber^  oT  eternity  in  the  commonly  understood  sense. 
:Wc  may  expept  tben  that  aionios  will  /eflect  thisj  double  • 
•'sense.  And  we  shall  find  our  antieipatidWs  verified  by  the 
fact.  •  Let  us  first  listen,  however,  to  Dr.  Farrar.  ^ 

-'   "I  now  cpme,"  be  says,  in  the  preface'  to  his  book,  "  Eternal 
Hope,"  "  to  aiaivioi,  translated  rightly  and  frequently  by  Eter- 
nal' an4  wrongly  and  unnecessarily  by  'everlasting.'      I  say 
wrongly  on  grounds  which  c'annot  be  impeached.^   'If  in  numbers 
'  of  passageslthife  word  does  not  and  cannot-menn  ^endless,'— a  fact 
which  none  but  the  ^rbssesfc  and  most  helpless  ignorance  ran  dis- 
j„ite,— it  cannot  bo  right  to  read  tliat  meaning  into  the  word, 
because   of  any  a  priori  bias,  in  other  pkssages^.     All  scholars 
alike'admit  tliatiii  many  places  dtwv  can  only  mean  '  age,'  and 
aiSvto^oxdy  '  agfe-long,' or   (tn  the   classic  sense  of  the  word) 
secul^  which  is  ofteU  equiyalentto  '  indefinite.^    Many  scholars 
who  have  a  good  right  to  be  heard,  deny  that  it  ever  necessarily 
means  .^  endless '  though  it  is  predicted  of  Mindless  things.  "^    ^     - 
■-'  In  a  note  he  gives  as  his  authority,  so  far  a^  the  Xew  Tes.- 
tament  is  concerned,  as  to  n^r^^v.t  no  reference,  and  as  to 
J^^y^o^  three  (Roni.  xvi.  25    '2   Tim.  i.  9;  Tit:  i.  2)'.     He 
adds,  "  He  who  said  a^o^^rtov  «»>  (eternal  fire)   use*  the. 
word  a  few  hours  after  In  a  sense  that  had  nothing^  do' 
\\{itbtime  (J.  xvii.  3)."     '  ',  '    ' 

\Thi8  sense  he  mentions  in  his  sermon  on  hell  as  implymg 
somethiBg' spiritual,'— something  above  and  beyond  time^ 


.  i 


"  llial  '  endless 
Sert.  v.,  on  T)r 


*  Doctors  differ.     Mr.'Oxeiiliam  m  )v     •  LettPr  ''  says 

^nsey'-  Permnn.  '        "  ,      ,     ,  ■    .u 

t  By  a  ^JPrirn!  onor  Ajr^y  nnri  ^u.^r,r^i  ],av^  rhaiipftd  plaC^^  »"  thft 

noil"  •  <       y  .    ,       ,         r. 

tDocto.'S   <l*'flfei-   h^r^.  al^'-      Mr    To?     w-liw  di^ciElo   Vr.   Farrar 
TYiainly  is.  yel    ijpeaks  o^'  th'f^  '^th'or  \v>        -f  .hniu  nuA  ixic.ivxvi^.m 


■9^. 


1 


r 


f 


h 


■  1... 


:* 


270        FACTS  AND  THEOKIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKG/STATE. 

— ^as  when  the  knowledge  of  God  is  said/ to  be  eternal 
life."  lie  proceeds  :— •'  So  that  whert  with  /your  futile  bill- 
i^^^ou  foist  into  this  word  the  fiction  /of  endless  time, 
m  do  hut  give_^  the  lie  to  the  mightjr  o^th  of  tl*^t  great 
^t,  w^ho  set  one  foot  upon  the  soa  and  one  uj)oVi  tTbe  land, 
1^  with  hand  uplifted  to  lieavon,  swore/by  Him  that  liv^tia 
bvc-r  and  ever,  that  time  should  be  n6  more.'"*  '  j^  W^ 
'"^^iVis  excnrsus.upon  the  word,  at  thp  end  of  the  boo1i:,he 
is  us  that —  '  .  /        . 


Vs",,!) 


If- 


'■>■  '  t 


.  "it  is  not  worth  while  once,  moi-c  to  discuss  its  meaning, 
when  it  has  been  so  ably  proved  by  so  jhany  writers  that  there  is 
no  autJiorifj)  ivlmt  ever  for  render  iii(j\t  [pnerhtatiari,''  and  when  even 
those  who  like  Dy.  Pusoy  arc  such  earnest  defenders  of  tho  doc- 
trine of  an  endless  hell,  yet  admit  that  the  word  only  rdeans 

V* endless  within  the  sphere  of  its  own  existence,'  so  that  on  their 

'&ym  showing  the  word  does  not  prove  their  point." 

Ik    ;  V      ■  "  f 

'    And  he  adds  : —  /, 

** irmay  be  worth  while,  ^however,  once  rnore  to  point  out  to 

"less  educated  readers,  thai  dioDv,  d too  vio^,  and  their  Hebrew 

equivalents  in   all  combinations,  are  repeatedbf  used   of  things 

which  tiave  come  mid-  shall  come  to  an  end.      Even  Augustine 

admits  (what  indeed  no  one  can  deny)  that  in  Scripture  aicov, 

~-        aioij'io?  must  in  many  instances  mean  'having  an  end,' and  St. 

Gregory  of  Nyssa,  who  al  least  knew  Greek,  uses  aiajyio?  as  the 

.     epithet  of  an  interval."   '        ^  ^  ,f 

i       •      /"  That  the  adjective  a/'&jVT'dS  IS  ,fl,pplied  to  some  things  which 

„iire  *  endless'  does  not;  of  cjours^,  prove  that  the  word  itself 

'  meant  endless  ;  and  to  introduiStf)  this  meaning  into  many  passages 

would  be" utterly  impossible  and  absurd.  .  :  ..Our  translators 

,       have  naturally  shrilnk'from  such  a  phrase  as  'the  endless  God.' 

,;  -      ,. '^ worlds  w.hi,cH^^^^         txelieve  I.eah,^»lrow  yon,  w/arj'ro? 
'  ^/"   tehhilbJs  above  ti)]^,  or  Ihjti  \\if,^^^^^^         oQ^tiast  time,  are  saturated 
.-     ^    .0      througli  and  tl<r«>ugll,  ^Vllh  tli©  tliought  and  el^nmnt  of  time  *'  (Salvator 

•y^:;  .;>>;. iiupFdi,. p.  100).'''  ,:  ^^  '  ,■■  ''■'■,.:■'''  '■'.■'„•„  "  ,■  ■  ■"  ■■^■■'  "...."'  '  * 
K,^.;;.^'^'  ",..■■■%■.  '■'♦■Br.: iFiirrar'Sliovc^" How, jie  ,<:an Iri'fle;  v(}fii"  Scrijilure .by  admit^g;  in' 
r.y--^:.^:  ^  ;  »4np>ttf  llmt'p^  may  meani^-^as  it  mast  cert?),in1y  do©s_meanr*- 

,  ,^^"  jr^ :  „  ?^'  tlkt^nb  fiir^^  de1ay^sfttoittt'  ini^ene.  -  Ef  th^pe-  be^  #;en  a^  possi- 
":  - 1  ">  /hilttjr  <St  tlMs,  ^by  ar^cefas  abd^te^ij^m  y^^afc  Isi]^^  ,i«>t  what 
"<c'f',it..'-  ,he^u6fes:i-  ,.„  „'„..■;'>  ":■■■■;  P'-  '-■::  „;.•■^:,  •■".::■''■:":.  :  -■.-    „-  ■/•.:■■'>■: 


'■  ■  ■::' »m"        "**  ■■  t/        ■  ■*' 


^  ■■  ■[<        ■■"     -      '•*■',  ■■■     ■■-       ■■   ■.•■\   ■       '•■-■  ■•  :. ■-■■■.•■-'.""     "     ■..--■/...-„'<..»....■'.. 

■'  "      ■■«„■'•'     „  ^^  ■,..»■■»■' "      ■••.•,..  •■•■\i>  <»--■  i|.V-.-':iv'"»,'^'' ;.■"':;-■:-     ""     ".:'    ■•..■.,...■.;;■ 


......    rt."",,  . 

■  V^ 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOliUTION  OF  THE  QUESTION. 


271 


The  utter  dearth  of  metaphysical  knowledge  renders  most  people 
incapable  of  realizing  a  condition Avhich  is  indejiondent  of  time— 
a  condition  which  crushes  eternity  into  an  hour,  and  extends  an  , 
hour  into  eternity.  But  the  philosophic  Jinvs  and  the  greatest  - 
Christian  Fathers  were  qiiite  familiar  with  it.  'iEon.'saysPlulo, 
•is  the  life  of  God,  and  is  not  time,  but  the  archetype  of  time, 
and  in  it  there  is  neither  past,  present,  nor  future.'  " 

This  is  Dr.  Farrar's  whole  arfjuinent.  It  is  not  all  he 
says,  of  course  ;  but  it  presents  fully  his  thoughts.  We  may 
now  compare  his  thoughts  with  Scripture. 

And  it  is  remarkable  how  little  his  appeal  ia  to  the  New 
Testament.     He  refers  largely  to  the  Old,  that  is,  to  the 
Septuagint  version,  but  as  to  the  New,  three  passages  of  an 
exceptional  character,  in  each  of  which  occ^irs  the  phrase^; 
"seonial  times''  constitute  reaily   his  whole   appeal  1     We 
have  seen,  to^,  that  as  to  the  phrases  in  the  New  Testament 
for  "forever,"  etc.,  he  does  not  venture  one  single  appeal  I 
This  is  the  final  result  after  so  miich  erudite  research,  out 
of  near  one  hundred  and  fifty  passages  to  be  consulted,  (^le 
phrase  recurring  in  three  of  them  is  produced  I 

Dr.  Farrar's  will  to  produce  more,  if  he  could,  need  not 
be  doubted.     His  learning  is  not  for  jtic  to  question.     Hi» 
mind  is  enlarged  enough  to  apprehend  that  metaphysical  eter- 
nity of  which  we  shall  have  more  to^say  by  and  by,  but  ^hich 
the  unmetaphysie^l  part  of  mankind  can  so  little  realize,  and 
which  Dr.  Beecher  calls,  somewhat  otherwise  interpreting  the 
&ct8,  "  to  common  sense  minds,  nonsense."     Y^t  after  all, 
this,  is  the  r(^«ult,  after  weighing  (as  we  must  give  him  credit 
for  doing)  one  huntlred  and  fifty  passages,  one  phrase  in 
three  passages  where  aionios  cannot  mean  "  endless." 
. .     And  let  me  put  the  force  of  that  a  little  plainer ;  for  it  is 
a  kind^of  argument   we   have  before  encountered  in  the 
mouth  of  some  with  whom  Dr.  Farrar  would  not  perhaps 
, :  like  to  be  associated,  but^  which  needs  to  be  made  plain  to 
be  duly  appreciated :-:     *        "-     %       £,-  ,.  t  5 - 

I^etmia  cannot  \k^  "spirit "  ^n  the  first  clause  ot  Johnin.^ 
"g-;  it  ought  not  therefore  to  >>e^';^ri"*  "  '"  *^^  ^^^^  "^^  ^* 
/     the  same -verse.  4       '^^ 


.^*.. 


' ^-  \ 


'h 


& 


I' 


II     l» 


t  iv 


i;.- 


'U: 

f  ^ 


^ 


272         FACTS  AND  THE0K1E8  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

Psudhe  is  over  and  over  again  used  for  "  lifi?,"  where  to 
translate  it  "  soul "  would  be  an  impossibility.  Therefore 
you  cannot  insist  upon  its  being  "  soul "  where  the  Lord 
speakB  of  man  as  bt'liig  uiiubU;  to  kill  it. 

Let  us  put  the  parallel  :— 

Aio)iios  cannot  mean  '*  endless  "  in  a  passage  where  it  Avould 
read  "  endless  thiitsy  Therefore  it  cannot  mean  this  when 
(jrod  is  spoken  of  as  the  ''eternal  God." 

I  can  quite  understand  that  Dr.  Farrar  will  not  own  his 
argument  in  that  shape,  but  its  only  shame  with  him  is  the 
shame  of  its  nakedness.  He  has  clothed  it  with  fair  words, 
which  after  all  cannot  prevent  its  halting  badly. 

Why  does  he  not  show  us  that  aionios  cannot  mean  "  end- 
less" in  some  of  the  pa.ssages  in  which  we  affirm  it  does, 
instead  of  taking  up  those  in  which  we  are  as  clear  as  he  is 
that  it  does'  not  f  Why  does  he  avoid  the  real  issue,  to 
create  a  false  one  ?  Dr.  Farrar's  animus  evidently  obscures 
his  judgment,  fatally  to  the  argument  he  maintains.  "  Even 
Augustine,"  he  tells  us,  "  admits  {tchat,  indeed,  no  one  can 
deny)  that  in  Scripture,  «7&ir,  diojvto'i  must  in  many  instan- 
ces MEAN 'havhig  an  end.' "  I  do  not  believe  myself  the 
only  one,  by  some  thousands  at  least,  who  would  deny  it. 
Nay,  I  must  believe  that  it  is  merely  careless  writing  when' 
Dr.  F.  affirms  this.  Aionios  nevej;  meant  "  haVing  an  end  " 
yet,  and  pone  should  know  it  better  than  himself.  It  IS 
affirmed  of  thuu/s  icldch  have  an  end,  and  in  those  cases  of 
course  cannot  mean  "  endless."  No  one  will  deny  that :  and 
that  is  all  (I  suppose)  that  he  means  to  affirm. 

A  moment  yet  as  to  the  Septuagint.  ■ 

>¥  Dr.  Farrar  ignores  the  necessary  change  of  meaning  in 
words  in  lapse  of  time,  and  which  Dr.  Beecher's  history  of 
it  (certainly  from  no  point  of  view  hostile  to  Dr.  F.'s  theory) 
so  plainly  shows  as  to  the  word. in  question.  Even  the  Septu- 
agint does  not  refuse  the  later  meaning  of  aion  by  any  means 
altogether,  while  the  X.ew  Testament  shows  this  later  mean- 
ing almost  superseding  the  earlier,  as  the  time-sense  in  the 
Septuagint  itself  h.as  superseded  the  earlier  Homeric.     It  is 


it 


i^Mii. 


.^f 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION  OF  THE  (iUESTlDN.        2t6 

well-nigh  as  vain  to  bring  up  the  Septuagint  to  settle  the 
case  for  .the  New  Testament,  as  to  bring  up  Homer  to  settle 
it  for  the  Se[)tuagint.  '  ; 

And,  comparing  the  Old  Testament  With  the  New,  where 
have  you  the  leolam  vaeil?  of  the  Hebrew  reproduced  in  the 
Greek  ?  That  expression  which  does  indeed  imply  a  "  be- 
yond "  to  the  oUuu  is  never  nised  for  the  New  Testament 
aion.  Save  only  a  word  twice  used  (and  where  hi  one  pas- 
sage out  of  the  two,  people  deny  for  it  also  that  it  means 
"everlasting"!),  there  is  no  other  expressio^i  for  this  but 
aionios;  no  other  for  eternity  but  some  phrase  compoun<led 
of  aion.  The  question  is  one  of  blotting  or  l|Ot  evary  phrase 
for  eternit^ijr  out  of  Sqripture.  /,  . 

I  beg  Dr..  Farrar's  forgiveness,  1  must  modify  that  state- 
ment. ;  He  will  allow  us  to  say '■eternal' if  only  by  that 
we  do  not  mean  ",'  everlasting."     But  doeyytot  he*know  that 
we  of  the  less  learned  see   no   difference l^ween  the  two? 
Of  course  I  do  not  disi)ute  his  right  to  gjCr'baek  to  deriva- 
tions and  to  speak  of  r/'6v///i -or  of -^e^^.s,  as  he  will.     The 
derivation  of  a  word  is  one  thing ;  its  actual  nm  is-  another. 
Do  we  use  eternal  in  any  other  sense  than  vverlasting  really? 
As  I  have  saltt^  it  really  comes  to  this,  thJit  the  expression 
(in  the  sense  we  have  received)  mu.st  difftppear  out  of  the 
English  language— for   aught  I  know,  out  of  every  other 
too,— as  well  as  out  of  Scripture.     Dr.  Be^^er  will  not  let 
usf  have  "  everlasting  "  any  more  thin'  Dr.  Rfi^ar  will  *'  eter- 
nal," and  with  just  as  good  reason.     So  serious  is  the  ques- 
tion.    And  we  can  only  conclude  that  If  learning  and  sense 
are  so  oppose*!  as  tlwjy  seem  to  be,  we  may  as  well  retain 
the  latter  and  dij^miss  the  former,  ^ 

We  might  thfen  perhaps  as  well^BIrn  to  simplicity  and" 


*  Dr.  Farrar  takes  even"  this  term  a^  not  illjpl^ 
the  one  exception  is  nieroly  a  liinitat^on  fr|^ 
spoken  of,  which  in  no  wisse  shtt.Ws  a  limitation  .e*^ 
even  ^  the-"  everlasting  "hills  so  often  urged, 
Farriploubt  what  we  mean  hy  "  everlasting  "  1 

t  "^'''^^"S,  Rom.  i.  tJO  i  Judc  6. 


fcr\ie  eternity  ;  but 

,itre  of  the  thing 

•e;     If  we  speak 

that  make.  Dr. 


"f 


i 


1  I" 
r 


I 


I 


:n 


A  « 


u 

■^ 


tion  too,  of  cour 
added  to  exprc 
That  textual 
Ivill  heli>  us  here 


#'■.'■■' 


274        FACrtJ  AJJD  THEOEIE* AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

English,  but  we  must  not  copy  the  example  of  those  whom 
we  have  taxed  with  neglect  of  ascertaining  the  New  Testi^- 
ment  use  of  the  word.  We  must  seek  ourselves  to  ascertain 
it ;  and  out  of  C8  passages  remaining  to ,  us,  omitting  the 
three  produced  by  Dr.  Farrar,  we  may  surely  discover  the 
ordinary  sense  attaching  to  it. 

,  But  first,, what  of  these  three  passages?  what  does  the 
expression  mean— " iconial  thacs'' ?  Does  "  leonial  "  there  ; 
speak  of  limited  duration  ?  I  think  we  may  very  fairly  argue 
that  it  does  not  there  sjieak  of  duration  at  all.  "Times"  is 
the  word  whiph  th«2^„  implies  duration,  and  limited  dura- 
/:c  .»..-„iJli^'-},y  t]jcn  should  another  word  bo 

le  thing?' 

deprecated  so  nmch  by  Dr.  F'arrar 
have  Ibefore  heard  of  a  mystery  "  hid-  . 
den  from  (ifjes  and  generations,''  and  now  made  manifest  to 
the  saints  (Col.  ,1."  2C),  and  we  have  seen  that  the  ages  here 
are  those  of  preparation  for  Christ's  coming,  an(J  closed  by 
His  death ;  so  that  how  upon  us  the  ends  of  the  ages  are 
(*ome,  and  we  have  the  full  admoiiition  of  what  happened 
unto  them  as  types.  '  A  reference  ^  Rom.  xvi.  26  will  show 
that  to  these  "  leonial"  or ''age-times  "  the  apostle  refers : 
times  which  had  the  character  of  "  ages "'  or  of  dispeii^atlons. 
This  is  wh^t  "a^onial  "  here  signifies  :  not  the  limited  dura- 
tion of  the  ^inies,  which  as  "  times  "  are  necessarily  limited, 
but  thpir  being  special,  divinely  constituted,  times.  ^ 

Gonial  here  then  strictly  means  "  belonging  to  the  ages"  : 
it  gets  its  meaning  from  the  first  sense  of  aion.  But  inas- 
much as  aion  has  the  sense  of  eternity  as  well,  we  may  ex- 
pect to  find  it  ^Iso  signifying  "  eternal;'  "  belonging  to  the 
age  of  ages."  Let  us  see  how  far  we  can  prove  this  mean-,, 
ing  to  be  in  aionlos,  i^i\.  how  far  general  in  the  New  . 
Testament  this  meaning  is. 

.  Now,  one  \|ery  plai*!!  passage,  one  would  think,  to  show- 
that  it  means,/'  eternal,'!  is  th^t  in  which  it  is  contrasted  with 
what  is  tempiral:  "the  things  which  -are  seen  are  temporal, 

^but  the  thingl  which  are  not  seen  are  eternal "  (2  Cor.  iv. 


verse  pre- 
eternal  in 


NEW  TESTAMENT  SOLUTION 

liy.     Hero  limitless  duration  must  bo 
limited. 

With  this  the  "  eternal  weight  of 
ceding  must  be  connected ;  and  also  " 
the  heavens  "  of  the  following  one. 

So  a^ain  in  Philem.  15  the  apostle  writes  :  "  For  perhaps 
he  therefore  departed  for  a  season ^  that  thou  shouldst  receive 
\x\m  forever  {dioovtov  avvoy  aVi"^;/?)  .  ,  .  a  brother  beloved ;" 
and  here  the  limited  duration  expresse<l  in  aionios  is  again 
contrasted  with  the  limited  "  for  a  season." 

Thus  simply  is  it  proved  to  have  the  sense  "eternal.'* 
And  why  then  should  its  force  be  doubted  when  wd  have  it 
applied  to  God,  to  His  "power "  and  "glory,"  to  the 
"  Spirit,"  to  the  khig^Iom  of  Christ,  to  the  saii^s'  "  life,"  "  in- 
heritance," "  habitations,"  '*  salvation,"  "  redemption  "?  And 
this  covers  all  the  occurrences  in  the  New  Testament  save 
those  relating  to  tl\a^ future  judgment,  and  two  others 
perhaps  somewhat  lessSecisive.  Of  these  the  "  everlasting 
covenjint"  we  need  not  doubt  to  be'strictly  such,  only  refer- 
ring to  the  past,  in  our  human  way  of  speaking,  the  "  covenant 
from  everlasting"  ;  while  "  the  everlasting  gospel " gives  us 
a  case  of  necessary  limitation  by  the  subject  to  which  the 
term  is  applied,  and  which  our  English  words,  while  incon- 
testable as  to  their  meaning,,  equally  admit. 

I  do  not  see  how  the  New  Testament  could  give  us  much 
more  assurance  of  "  aeonial"  being  (save  where  ^necessarily 
limited  by  the  subject)  "  eternal  "  in  the  fullest  sense. 

But  Dr.  Farrar  believes  this  is  only  because  of  "  the  utter 
dearth  of  metaphysical.knowledge  "  which  renders  us  "in- 
capable of  realising  a  condition  which  crushes  eternity  into 
an  hour,  and  extends  an  hour  mto  eternity."  We  Nioubt 
sincerely  if  Dr.  Farrar  can  realize  it.  "  Eternity  crushed  i^o 
an  hour,"  and  that  when  time  is  eliminated  from 
thought,  we  believe  to  be  simply  a  very  gross  absurdity. 
How  can  what  is  not  time  at  all  be  "  crushed  into  an  hour''  ? 
And  how  can  an  hour  which  is  "time,"  be  extended  into  an 
eternity  which  is  not  ?    Perhaps  we  should  get  on  no  better 


^r-^TT-- 


-  \  ' 

.  1 '■'    V. 

■  '^;i-|*-  ■■' 

■(■■          ■'          '    1           "    '  . 

'•*'; ' 

■.#'-;;■'■ 

. -  '■■,-.?"■■•■■•■  '■  ..  ■■■'■■■■•  v:-^#-,.-:  •'■ 

:■■               '  V.  "■             "-.'■ 

* 

■  ■'  ■  -'-'    '  ■ " 

■•■'     .  ■■::  ,,;j^4f^J\:^--\^        ■  ■;,<■. 

■,/ ■' 

'    -       ''  -J^':.-"- 

i:          :    /■■:.-., 

,-•/    '^-  -,.-.,  ■;  ■    ■■■  ■^-.-       ..  -^i; 

"■' 

•'  ':■ 

'■  '..''..'J''' 

- 

-  -  -"''^'  "'.'■■'■■■  ' 

■■   /.-;"'■;  ,:  /■  ;/■:■;  •,,.--f"  ■-■    -   .:  ■■■■■'  '     ..■ 

-"."" 

.     •  '      '■  .-' 

*■       ■      ■      "" 

^ 

■■'---•,.•    ■■  -...   ''■, ' 

■■■-■-fef'.-"''^'     -^^        ■■■'"•.■-/'I 

"■■'  f 

\:T       "■> 

- 

■'■'  y .  \': ■■y\'-^^^^^^ 

-  .          ■■.                                                   - '               » '               ■■     -.  ..'it' 

■     ■''■■■      "  \  ■  ■'■'>."  '  \-.     ■■"r/  .  -■    .'''  '--iry  ■  . 

'^■r  ■ 

-"■.■'•■■■   .^  ; 

.   .      ■  .        .    -^     ■ 

■  .  '   \      'V             ■.-^'■'.■:^  '''          ■■■■■■.■■■■    ,^    '■ ' : 

-    -^-y'   ■  '■      :"                               -■■'                        ■:  '^"•'^■; 

■   ^ 

■          !'.,,■'• 

* 

■  i': 

"■     '-'> 

■-■-■',              ■■,■■.-                   '                      './•■-.  /V 
'"-■■■                      ',"■."■'-                                  *              -'■  . 

.!?.      ■ 

■  -    '    '.''-- 

■     ■     -'■'■■'                       "'        ■/      ■ 

> 

■.. 

y  [^'^  ■yyy^K:^'' 

■.■"*"•< 

'- 

■ 

>'•■..'- 

;  Jr'y^ 

i> 

ft 

/  ■■-, 


:l^ 


^i. 


« 


:* 


t    '^^ 


*  .-: 


m 


ci 


ir'i'K   >-•;.-.l■:^Jjl;iB■>■-^■ -•■>'  -'  ■-.'>'"  -T~<^..-.v< 


v 


t 


a 


it 


As«ociatien  for  Information  and  Imaoo  Managamont 

1100  Wayne  Avenue,  Suite  1 100 
*  Silver  Spring.  Maryland  20910  , 

301/587-8202 


k 


A 


O 


.<t 


'^' 


%0 


ii9 


^'s 


Genti  meter 

1         2        3 


Jii^i|ii)i|ii|i|ii|i|ii|ibi|i^l/i|il)ipl^^^ 
Inches 


10       n       12       13       14       15   mm 


2  3  "*       4 


\.0    it. 

1^ 


I.I 


IL25  i  1.4   li.6 


**•* 


*;* 


w 


1 


m 


•.t:^:i^ 


''»«S«.-/    ]■ 


MRNUFRCTURED  TCT  AlIM  STfiNDRRO'S 
-    PY  RPPLIED   IMRGE,    INC. 


4l^     ^ 


n 

ft- 


ft' 


i 


a; 

if 


n. 


m 


II. 


it  K- 


276         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

«        "  ■  ■  ■  ■ 

with  Philo  and  the  Christian  "fathers."  We  do  think 
there  is  more  of  Plato  than  of  Scripture  in  their  thought's  as 
to  this,  and  tierhaps  it  is  this  at  bottom  which  ^)#kes  Dr. 
Farrar  reject  the  ^^w  Testament  "ages  of  ages"^  as  being 

'■*the  true  expression  of  eternity;  for  here^in  pity  to  our 
human  faculties  it  may  be,  but  still  the  el^ient  of  time  is 
not  eliminated  from  the  idea  of  eternity ;  eternity  is  just 
illimitable  time.  And  we  may  thank  Ood  He  does  not 
writ,e  merely  for  metaphysicians,  but  for  "  babes." 

But  then  a^^ain  we  read  that  aionios  "  is  in  its  second  sense 
something  '  spiritual ' — something  above  and  beyond  time,^ 
as  when  the  knowledge  of  God  is  said  to  be  eternal  life." 

.  Does  l^r.  Farrar  really  mean  thW;  ^'  eternal  "  here  signifies 
•'  spiritual  "  ?  Or  does  he  mean  to  refer  it  to  that  metaphys- 
ical eternity  which  maybe  crushed  into  an  hour  and  be 
eternity  all  the  same?  If  it  be  the  latter  I  have  said  all 
that  is  needful ;  if  the  former,  I  scarcely  need  reply.  Why 
should  not  aionios  be  "  sorhething  "  holi/,  because  "  eternal 
life  "  is  that;  or  anything  else  almost  by  the  substitution  of 
whiph  the  obnoxious  sense  of  eternity  may  be  most  thor- 
oughly blotted  out  ? 


CHAPTER  XXVm. 

THE  KEW TESTAMENT  SCKIPTl  RKS  AS  TO  THE  JUDGMENT  OF 

THE    WORLD. 

We  are  now  free  to  enter  upon  the  New  Testament,  un- 
embarrassed by  the  questions  which  would  otherwise  divert 
us  too  far  from  the  study  of  the  special  texts  which  we  shall 
now  have  to  consider.  And  in  order  to  pursue  our  study  of 
the  subject  with  more  clearness,  we  shall  first  seek  to  separate 
from  the  texts  which  speak  of  final  judgment  thpse  which 
speak  of  the  judgment  of  the  living  when  the  Lord  appears. 

We  have  already  looked  at  this  from  the  side  of  the  Old 
Testament,  as  it  is  indeed  a  point  of  main  concern  through- 


THE  JUDOMEXT  OF  THE  WORLD. 


277 


iGMENT  OF 


out  it.  But  the  New  Testament,  while  going  beyond  the 
Old  as  far  as  the  literal  sense  extends,  doejg  not  by  any 
means  lose  sight  of  the  coming  judgment  at  the  appearing- 
of  the  Lord.  The  millennial  blessing  as  to  the  earthly  part 
of  it  is  indeed  very  briefly  touched  on,  and  the  blessings  in 
heavenly  places  are  substituted  for  this,  Christian  promises 
instead  of  Jewish  ones.  And  in  accordance  with  this  the 
judgment  coming  on  the  earth  is  more  a  solemn  warning  to 
the  impenitent  and  unbelieving,  than  as  conni>cted  with  the 
hope  of  the  saints  themselves*    >  ,-^         • 

The  Jewish  promises  being  earthly,  necessarily,  for  those 
who  are  to  inherit  them,  the  earth  must  he  delivered  from 
what  defiles  and  destroys  II.  Israel's  foes  miist  be  put  doAvn 
with  the  strong  hand  of  power,  that  they  may  be  nation- 
ally saved,  and  inherit  the  earth.  Christians,  on  the  other 
hand,  rightly  expect  to  be  with  the  Lf)rd  in  heaven  in  the 
Fathers  house  according  to  His  promise-  (John  xiv.  1-3). 
y/ieir  part  in  the  millennial  kingdom  is  to  reign  over  the 
earth  with  Christ,  but  this  is  not  to  be  Confoundefl  with  liv- 


Y^. 


mg  on  It. 


It  is  not,  of  course,  possible  here  to  dwell  upon  the  points    jI 
in  controversy  between  so-called  pre-millenriialists,  and  the  .  ^ 
advocates  of  a  merely  spiritual  reign.     Still  it  will  be  found 
that  the  connection  of  truth  is  everywhere  so  Intimate  in 
Scripture  that  a  wrong  view  as  to  th^  millennium  may  con 
fuse  many  an  otherwise  clear  passage  of  the  gravest  impor- 
tance as  to  the  present  question.    As  already  said,  th«  putting 
off  the  Lord's  coming  to  the  end  of  the  millennium  confounds 
together  two  wholly  differenti,  epochs  of  judgment.     But 
what  has  been  already  urged  as  to  this  must  suffice  us  now. 
Tl^e  texts  which  apply  to  the  judgment  of  the  living  in  the 
New  Testament  in  general  present  no  special  difficulty. 

(1.)  First,  in  the  Baptist's  words*  we  have  Israel,  I  doubt 
not,  purged  by  judgment  at  the  coming  of  the  Lord.  "He 
will  thoroughly  purge  His  floor,  and  gather  His  wheat  into 
the  garner,  but  He  will  bum~up  the  JchaS  with  unquench- 
able fire."    It  is  a  figure   of  judgment  wholly  inconsistent       - 


ir 


u 


I 


■ft 


W 
.11 


?,'f 

■H 


It 


i^ 

V 


%!•- 


■^' 


.^ 


278        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

with  hope  for  those  condemned  as  "  chafiF."  Annihilationists 
would  naturally  claim  it  as  a  figure  of  utter  destruction,  andf- 
So  it  is.  But  then  a  figure  and  what  it  figures  arc  as  differ- 
ent things  as  here  the  "  chaff  "  is  from  tW^ncn  compared  to 
them.  This  is  what  these  writers  constantly  ignore.  They 
argue  from  the  literal  effect  of  material  fire  as  if  the  fire, 
<  the  thing  subject  to  it,  and  the  cfect  itself  were  not  all  in 
some  respects  as  much  contrasted  as  compared.  Material 
destruction  is  not  a  figure  of  material  destruction.  It  niust 
y/</fnc something  else.  '  ,    /;' 

Not  of  course  its  spiritual  opposite :  4ind  here  it  is  that 
universalism  of  all  gradtes  so  completely  fails.  Material  de- 
straction  cannot -figure  spiritual  restoration.  It  is  wholly 
and  absolutely  opposed  to  this.  But  it  figures  spiritual  de- 
^strUction  on  the  other  hand,  and  not  material;  and  here 
annihilationism  of  all  grades  Tails  as  completely. 

When  God's  wrath  is  the  fire  and  man  its  objecf,- who  c 
argue  that, the  necessary  effect  will  be  his  material  destruc^ 
tion?  Certainly  it  must  be  argued  at  least  on  some  othfci- 
ground  than  this.  And  this  has  been  attempted  according- 
ly, Isa  Ivii.  16  being  quoted  in  the  random  and  cai^less  way, 
I  must  say  not  unusual  with  them,  to  show  that  "the  spirit 
would  fail  before  "  His  constant  anger,  "  and  the  souls  that 
He  had  made."  '^But  this  is  said,  in  the  style  of  the  Old 
Testament  which  we,  have  befilfre  insisted  on  at  length,  of 
death  as  the  effect  upon  mortal  nrian  here,  and  has  no  refer- 
ence to  that  judgment  which  is  beyond  death  itself  The 
argument  is  therefore  inadmissible. 

I  have  shown  befoie  what  man's  utt^r  destruction  is.. 
It  is  his  perishing  from  the  place  for  which  he  was  naturally 
made  and  fitted,  and  \his  by  the  wr^th  of  God  because  of 
sin  :  this  solemn  judgment  it  is  that  may  fipd  its  figure  in 
the  chaff  burned  in  the  fire.  No  material  destruction  can 
be  argued  from  it.  ' 

.  Here  the  perishing  even  from  the  earth  ml^y  be  intended, 
for  a  similar  figure  is  often  used  in  the  Old  T^estament  when 
God's  wruth  takes  away  living  men.     And  to  the  judgment 


struction  can 


^. 


THE  JUDGMENT  OP  THE   WOULD. 


279 


of  the  living  the  words  hereaip^ply.  Yet^  this  case  eternal 
judgment  is  so  closely  connected  with  it,  Uiat  I  sec  no  use 
in  separating  between  them.  <      ' 

(2.)  In  Matt.  xxii.  13  we  are  again  warned  of  the  judgment 
at  the  Lord's  coming.  The  time  is  when  the  khig  comes  in 
to  see  the  guests  invited  and  presenting  themselves  at  the 
marriage-feast.  The  scene  is  earthly  :  no  guest  will  find  his 
w:ay  into  heaven  and  be  turned  out.  But  'here  there  is  no 
figure  even  of  destruction.  The  judgment  is,  "  Bind  him 
hand  and  foot,  and  cast  him  into  outtr  darkness :  there  shall 
be  weeping  and  gnashing  of  teeth."  I  need  only  refer  to  a 
similar  picture  in  ch.  viii.  12. 

Here  "  darkness''  is  not » annihilation,  even  in  figure. 
There  can  bo  none  as  punishment jjvhere  there  is  no  eye  to 
behold  4ight  if  it  were  there.  In  ch.  xxv.  30  the  unprofitable 
servant  is  adjudged  th  the  same  thing ;  and  in  Jude  13,  we 
shall  find  it  again  in  stronger  language  used  for  an  eternal 
doon).  f " 

(3.)  1  p:;ss  over  the  separation  of  the  sheep  from  the  goats, 
because  although  it  is  i-eally'tlie  judgment  of  living  people 
when  Christ  comes,  the  terms  of  it  connect  it  plainly  with 
the  final  iud'jrment.  We  shall  examine  it  therefore  in  an- 
other  place. '  Luke  xix.  27  again  refers  to  the  Lord's  cOming, 
and  presents  no  difl^culty.         , 

(4.)  Luke  XX.  18  is  again  one  of  those  pictures  in  which 
material  destruction  figures  another  thing.  I  need  scarcely 
repeat  what  I  have  just  now  said  about  a  parallel  case. 

(5.)  We  may  pass  on  now  to  2  Thess.  i.  7-9,  upon 'which 
we  shall  dwell  somewhat  longer.  It  manifestly  speaks  of 
a  time  "  when  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  be  revealed  from  heaven 
with  His  mighty  angels,  in  fiaming  fire,  takhig  vengeance  on 
them  that  know  not  God,  and  that  obey  not  the  gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ :  who  shall  be  punished  with  everlasting 
destruction  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and  from  the  glory 
of  His  power,  when  He  shall  come  to  be  glorified  in  His 
saints,"  etc.  , 

Mr.  Dobney  has  the  most  fully  of  all  writers  that  I  know. 


■«1 


--s?--. 


x.;-. 


\ 


I  It 

^  It 
If 
t 


■ 


m 


J' Si 


-/ 


1f 


'X 


280        FACTS  AXD  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTURE  STATE. 

examined  this  passage  in  behalf  of  annihilationism.  I  shall 
therefore  follow  his  argument  as  to  it.  He  brings  Whitby 
and  .Alaeknighyorward  to  shpw  that  the  "  literal  sense  '  aj)- 
peared  so  mai^iestly  the  trueX^ne  to  these  expositors  that 
even  they  "had  to  adopt  it  to  the  fullest  extent  their  mental 
philosophy*  would  allow,"  and  admit  that'  the  "  utter  d^- 
struetion  of  the  bodies  [of  the  wicked]  without  any  b<ypeof 
their  regaining  new  bodies"  /«  mvolved  in.  the  passage. 
,  And  Mr.  D.  presses  that ''  beyond  dispute,  the  sinner  in  his 
entircness  ca7i  be  destroyed  literally';  and  if  the  word  has 
any  literal  foree  at  all  in 'this  passage,  it  eomes  in  all  its 
tremendous  fulness  against  the  wliole  man,  and  not  merely 
against  a  part  of  his  nature."* 

Now  here  is  an^  in^stance  of  the  value  of  a  little  knowledge 
of  what  tlie  J^ible  savsjisjo^dii^close  of  the  pr^^^^ 
of  things.  Had  Dr.  Whitby  been  ,i  pre-millennialist  instmd 
of  being  as  opposed  to  it  as  it  is  Avell  known  h^\vas,he 
would  have  understood  the  absolute  impossibility  of  "  ever- 
lasting destruction  "  being  what  he  Avould  make  it.  P^or  the 
passage  says  plainly  that  this  takes  place  at  Christ's  appear- 
nig,— />f/or6  the  millennium  therefore,  and  more  than  a 
thousand  years  before  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked.  In 
this  last  all  the  dead  not.  raised  a:t  the  first  resurrection  are 
to  rise.  Tt  is  iinpossible  then  that  the.se  coul4, Jiave  been  (in 
that  sense)  eternally  destroyed,  and  so  never  to  rise,  a  thou- 
sand years  before.  To  any  one  who  holds  therefore  to  a  true " 
millennium,  and  Christ's  coming  before  it,  this  text  alone 
should  be  <lecisive  that  "  everlasting  destruction  "  is  not  an 
nihilation.  Thus  error  is  linked  with  error,  and  truth  with 
truth. 

I  need  not  follow  Mr.  Dobney  iii  his  further  remarks  upon 
the  expressiun  "  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord  and  from  the 
glory  of  His  power,"  as  I  do  not  take  this  to  mean  ''away 
from."  I  am  quite  content  to  accept  Mr.  Hudson's  reference 
to  "  the  times  of  refreshing  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord" 
as  a  parallel  instance  of  the  use  of  that  .phrase.  In  either 
*  Sciii»tui.'  I)(.(t.  of  FlU.  F^uiiislinieiit,  up.  -JK),  217.  ' 


ATE. 

9m.  I  shall 
Jg8  Whitby 
1  sense  "  aj)- 
ositors  thai 
iheir  mental 
"  utter  d^- 
my  b<ype  of 
le  passage, 
inner  in  his 
e  word  has 
8  in  all  its 
not  merely 

knowledge 
esent  brder 
ilist  instmd 

h^  was,  he 
y  of  "  ever- 
it.  For  the 
st's  appear- 
ore  than  a 
v'icked.  In 
rrection  are 
ive  been  (in 
"ise,  a  thou- 
ire  to  a  true  ^ 

text  alone 
"  is  not  an- 

truth  with 

marks  upon 
id  from  the 
ean  ''  away 
's  reference 
the  Lord" 
In  either 
17. 


THE  .lUDGMKNT   OF   THE    WORLD, 


281 


case  the  "presence  of  the  Lord  "  is  what  bringsVhether'thc 
judgment  or  the  blessing.  But  I  (Mnnot  allow  so  easily  his 
remarks  upon  "  evcrlastiifg."  I  believe  with  his  Eelectio 
reviewer  that  "the  apostle  in  speaking  of  c?JcT/a.s/<V/ de- 
struction, means  to  describe  something  Avhieh  has  continu- 
ance as  a  state  of  suffering,  and  not  extinction  of  boin<^." 

But  I  must  be  permitte*!  t6  state  my  own  reason  for  this, 
which  is  outside  all  Mr.  Dobney's  argument.  For,  suppps- 
ing  this  awful  penalty  to  l»o  inflicted  n/fer  resurrection, 
"  destruction  "alone  would  be  sufficiont  (if  a  material  de- 
struction) to  convey  thcVholelhought,  and  thp  additiftn  of 
"  everlasting"  would  be  redundant.  Annihilation  would  be, 
(tflfer  resurrection,  necessarily  everlasting,  for- there  is  no 
repetitiop  of  resurrection,  and  "  everlastinij  annihilation " 
has  no  proper  sense.  If  fh-fon'  resurrection,  then,  as  I  have 
said,  the  resurrection  afterwards  would  sufficiently  show  it 
was  not  "everlasting."  '    • 

I  have  shown  besides  that  "  destruction  "  is  not  what  Mr. 
D.  and  his  associates  mean  by  it. 

(C.)  In  the  next  chapter  we  have  another  Judgritent  which 
takes  place  at  the  sanie  tune,  but  the  special  destruction  of 
the  "wicked  onc.^^  Without  entering  too  much  into  par- 
ticulars, which  would  divert  us  too  from  our  ])rosent  aim,  it 
is  evident  that  we  have  in  this  "  wicked  one  "  a  person 
exalting  himself  above  God,  and  claiming  to  l>e  God  Him- 
self, and  whom  "  the  Lord  Jesus  shall  consume  with  the 
breath  (rtvevMa)  of  tlis  month,  and  an nnl  {narapytf^ei)  with 
the  manifestation  (or  appearing)  of  His  presence  {e.Tticpavem 
Ttji  jcapov^iai).  The  words  are  a  i)artial  (juotation  from 
Isa.  xi.:  "  and  there  shall  come' forth  a  rod  out  of  tTv^stem  of 
Jesse,  and  a  Branch  shall  grow  out  of  his  roots ;  atid  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  shall  rest  upon  Him;  ....  with  right- 
eousness shall  He  judge  the  p<ior,  and  reprove  with  equity 
for  the  meek  of  the  earth  ;  and  He  shall  smite  tlie  earth  with 
the  rod  of  His  mouth,  and  with  the  breath  of  ^is  lips  shall 
He  slay  the  wicked  (one)."  If  any  6ne  doubt  who  or  what 
is  in  question  here,  let  him  follow  on  this  quotation,  and 


FACTS  AND  THEOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


h^  will  find  a,  familiar  picture  of  millennial  days  when  "  the 
wolf  shall  dwell  with  the  lamb,"  and  also  Israel  and  Judah 
be  brought  frorii  the  four  comers  of  the  earth  and  finally 
united  toj^ethor. 

Thus  we  have,  both  in  Isaiah  and  Tliessdlonians,  a  pre- 
millennial  judgment  of  this  "  wiclied  one."'  In  the  latter  we 
are  distinctly  told  it  is  at  the  appearing  of  Christ's  presence. 
Words  could  hardly  more'  emphatically  declare  a  personal, 
not  a  merely  spiritual,  coming.  The  wicked  one  is  t^ien  to 
^e  "consumed"  and  "annulled,"  in  the  day  when  the  rod 
of  iron  shall  smite  (and  yet  to  heal)  the  earth.  ♦- 

Now,  if  we  turn  for  a  moment  to  Ilew  xix.,  we  shall  find 
there  (as  I  have  before  briefly  argued)  Christ's  coming  to 
the  earth.  It  follows  the  marriage  of  the  Lamb  in  heaven ; 
and  upon  the  white-horsed  warriors  Mho  follow  their  Head 
and  Lord  we  see  the  same  white  linen  which  before  clothed 
the  bride,  and  which  is  interpreted  for  us  as  the  "  righteous- 
ness of  saints  "  (ver.  8).  It  is  a  figure  of  course,  but  a  very 
intelligible  figure,  of  Christ's  appearing  with  tlis  saints; 
and,  as  the  sword  out  of  His  mouth  to  smite  tlje  nations 
answers  on  the  one  hand  to  Isaiah's  "rod  of  His  m(^th,"  so 
among  the  objects  of  the  judgment  we  have  two  leaders,  one 
of  which  (it  does  not  matter  for  our  purpose  which)  is  gen- 
erally allowed  to  be  "  the  wicked  one.'*  Indeed,  it  seems 
hardly  possible  for  one  who  believes  in  any  harmonious 
interpretation  of  the  word  of  God  to  doubt  this.  The  his- 
tory of  the  beast  and  false  prophet  is  given  in  the  13th  and 
17th  chapters  of  the  book,  in  close  correspondence  with  what 
is  said  in  Thessalonians,  and  there  could  hardly  be  a  third 
person  at  the  same  time  on  earth,  who  could  take  the  place 
that  these  do.      Y 

But  what  then  Is  the  "  consumption,"  or  "  annulling,"  or 
even  "  slhying "  (phtting  to  death)  of  this  wicked  one  ? 
"These  both  were  cast  alive  into  a  lake  of  fire  burninofwith 
brimstone,"  and  tliere  they  are  found  still  alive  a  thousand 
years  afterwards !  , 

We  shall  have  to  return  to  this  again.     But  hern  at  least 


ifiliX^ 


THE   IIESURRECTION   OF  JUDGMENT. 


283 


sv'c  shall  find 


how  fully  evident  that  to  be  "consumed,"  "annulled,"  and 
"put  to  <li'ath,"  oven,  when  applied  to  the  final  judgment  of 
the  wicked,  do  not  mean  material  destruction  or  annihdation 
at  all.  Let  Mr.  Constable  and  others,  instead  of  indulging 
in  a  priori  c^soning  as  to  the  force  of  the  words,  only  ex- 
amine the  interpretation  of  them  by  the  facts  of  Scripture, 
and  they  will  soon  have  indisputable  proof  that  the  general 
sense  of  Christendom  has  not  been  so  far  astray  as  to  these 
common  words  of  not  very  recondite  meaning.  Nor  are 
they  badly  suited  to  convey  just  Avhat  they  have  conveyed 
to  generations  of  at  least  ordinary  intelligence  as  to  Jhe 
every  day  speech  they  used. 

I  do  not  know  of  any  other  passages  referring  to  the 
judgment  of  the  living  Avhich  can  cause  any  difficulty,  save 
one  which  has  been  reserved  for  future  consideration. 


CHAPTER  XXIX. 


:,  THE  IIESUIIKECTIOX  OF  JUDGMENT. 

The  Lord,  in  the  5th  chapter  of  the  gospel  of  John,  de- 
clares as  distinct  the  "  resurrection  of  life  "  find  "  the  resur- 
rection of  judgment."  I  have  before  noticed  that  the  word 
"  damnation  "  in  this  place  (as  in  ver.  24,  the  word  "  con- 
demnation ")  is  the  ordinary  word  for  "judgment." 

Dr.  Farrar,  it  is  well  known,  has  raised  the  question  as  to 
whether  the  former  word  and  its  cognates  reajly  occur  a^  all 
in  the  New  Testament.  I  should  aijree  with  him  entire 
in  discardincj  them  in  favor  of  a  consistent  rendering;  of  the 
Scripture  words  all  through.*  But  he  metms  that  this 
should  go  a  good  deal  further,  and  evi<lently  to  expunge,  if 
possible,  the  thought  of  what  we  now  mean  by  "  damnation  " 


hero  at  least 


*  In  such  passages  as  1  Cor.  xi.-  29, 1  Tim.  v.  12,  Rom.  xiv.  23,  the 
ordinary  rendering  is  impossible  and  misleading,  as  he  rightly  urges. 


284 


?MtS  AND 


THKORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  STATE. 


I! 


\if 


k 


from  Scriptii*ealabg  with  the  word.  But  "  damnation  "  is 
only  eternal  judgnu-nt,  in  i\\v  true  (not  his)  sense  of  "eter 
n:iiy  and  "eternal  judgment  "  in  assorted  in  the  fullest,  way. 
And  when  he  tells  us  that  the  'judgment  of  Gehenna"  is 
"  something  utterly  «liti*ereut  "from  the  "  damnation  of  hell," 
we  must  entirely  diflfer  from  him:  but  this  will  come  up 
anon.  The  fact  is  that  ihe  uiiuttlerahly  solcihh  meaning  now 
at t aching  to  damnation  has  onJy  grown  out  of  the  impres- 
sion whicK  that  eternal  Judgment  has  made  uponthose  who 
helieved  the  Scripture  statements.* 

But  in  some  places  ''  danmation  "  is  even  inferior  in  force 

'to  that  wonl  "jtidgment,''  apparently  so  nmch   le.ss  strong. 

In  thatlwfore  us  for  instance  its  use  has  obscured  tlie  solenuu 

'  Veality  that  none  cau^ome  personally  into  judgniei'it  before 

>  God,  except  to  be  cotidenmed.     This  is  everywhere  what 

Scripture  asserts,  and  here  with  a  force  perhai)S  little  less 

than  that "^f  any.     For  it  is  only''  they  that  have  done  evil" 

who  come  fortli  to  a  ''resurrection  of  iudirnient"  at  all. 

How  plainly  this  should  tell  us  that  the  saints  cannot  be 


*  Mr.  Cox  objectH,  that  if  any  •'  take  thtj '  judgment '  of  God  .as  e<^,ul v 
alent  to  '  daianation,' tliat  can  only  be  because  they  conceive  ot  the, 
divine  Judynjeiits  as  though  they  were  contined  to  the  future  Hfe, 
wlierea^s  the  Scriptures  constantly  allirra  that  God  judges  all  men,  good 
and  had,  every  day  and  all  day  long  ;  and  because  they  wholly  nnsa,p- 
prehend  the  character  of  the  divine  Judge  and  Father  "  (Salv.  Mun.,  p, 
61,  Amer.  edit.). 

It  5s  Mr.  Cox  who  does  not  apprehend  the  difference  between  the 
judgment  of  the  Father,  now  for  our  pi*(jflt,  and  the  judgment  of  the 
day  in  which  "  the  Father  ]nilgf^i\i  no  man."  The  two  are  contrasted 
by  the  apostle :  "  The  time  is  come  that  judgment  must  begin  at.  the 
house  of  God  :  and,  if  it  firSt  beain  at  us,  what  shall  the  end  be  of  them 
that  obey  not  tfie  gospel  of  God  1  And,  if  the  righteous  scarcely  be 
-aved,  where  shall  the  sinner  and  the  ungodly  appear  1  "  (1  Pet.  iv. 
17.  IS  ;  compare  ch.  i.  17,  18;  John  v.  '22-24  ;  1  Cor.  xi.  31,  32). 

But  God's  ju(lgment  ha.s  with  Mr.  Cox  no  such  meaning  as  would 
bring  terror  to  an  ungodly  soul.  Of  a  sensualist  living  prosperously  in 
the  world  he  asks,  "  Where  is  the  judgment  \)f  Godl  Whereas  it? 
Why,  tJiere  in  the  man  himself,  and  in,  his  base  caiUeiU  with  a  lot  no 
h<ne'\r  (S.  M.,  p.  02). 


inatioii  "  is 

!   of    "  I'tC'l- 

iilli'sl,  way. 
•lu'iiiia  "  is 
on  of  holl," 
I  come  up 
waning  now 
ho  inipres- 
tliost*  who 

ior  in  Ibrct' 
ess  strong, 
tliu  solenuK 
lei'jt  bel'ore 
vhvTti  what 
1  little  less 
(lone  evil " 
nt"  at  all. 
cannot  be 

jiodas  e<^,uiv 
iceiv<'  oT  ttic, 
J  future  life, 
ill  men,  good 
liolly  iinsa,p- 
alv.  Mun.,  p. 

between  the 
ment  of  the 
•e  contrasted 
begin  at  the 
1  be  of  tlieni 
.scarcely  be  ' 
"  (1  Pet.  iv. 
1,32). 

ng  as  would 
>sperously  in 
Vhereis  it? 
'/Hlh  a  lot  80 


5^^- 


miK   RKSUKRKCTION   <)P  JU DUMKNT. 


286 


numbered  among  ttiose  Hpoken  of  a.s  raiHed  for  judgment 
according  to  their  works  before  the  '*  great  whiUt  throne" 
(Uev.  .Y.K.  11-15). 

Vet  this  very  pas.sage  in  the  gospel  has  been  assnme*!  to 
prove  a  ^tvitra/ resurrection  (!>f  saints  anclifinners  together, 
because  it  i.s  said  ••  the  hatir  conu'tli  in  w)iit;h  all  that  are  in 
the  graves  shall  hear  His  voice  and  shall  come  forth,"  etc.; 
while  a  simple  comparison  of  three  verses  before  this  would 
demonstrate  that  the  "  hour  "  in  which  the  Son  of  God  has 
been  <)ui<;keningdea<l  souls  has  lasted  n<nv  eiajhteenbundred 
years  from  the  time  He  sj)oke.  Jfhe  Ltjrd  merely  asserts 
here  the  general  fact  that  all  shall  hear  His  voice,  while  He 
,  contrasts  in  the  most  absolute  w.iy  the  character  of  the  two 
resurrections  to  which  He  sunnnoiis  them. 

People  imagine  that  but  one  obscure  })assage  (which  is 
not  obscure  however)  in  a  book  of  visions  is  the  oidy  one 
which  can  be  brought  forward  for  a  '*  first  resurrection  "  of 
the  righteous,  whereas  in  fact  aln;||^|MPvery  pas.sage  that 
speaks  of  J?jDsurj»«ct ion  infers  it  in  soimy^hape.  .There  is  oven 
.a  speciat  pTiraseK)r  it,  "  the  resurrection  out  /rom  the  dead  " 
(*K  veKfjoor),  as  to  which  the  di.sciples  (who  knew  j>vell  the 
general  truth  of  re^rrection)  inipiired  "what  the  rising 
from  the  dead  should  mean"  (Mark  ix.  10).  It  was  of  this 
'special  resurrection  the  Lord  spoke,  whtm  in  answer  to  the 
,  Sadducees  He  said  that  "  tliey  which  shall  be  counted  worthy 
to  obtahi  that  world  " — -the  world  to  come, — ■"  and- the  res- 
urrection y'/o/M  the  dead,  neither  marry  nor  are  given  in  mar- 
riage, neither  ©an  they  die  any  more :  for  they  are  equal 
unto  the  angels  :  and  are  the  children  of  God,  7>f/;?</  the 
children  of  the  resurrection  "  {Luke  xx.  34-36).  How  could 
people  be  "  counted  worthy  "  to  ojjtain  a  general  resurrec- 
tton  which  no  one  can  lose  ?  or  be  the  children  of  God  as 
being  the  children  of  a  general  resurre'ction  ? 

Then  again,  where  the  apostle  is  expressly  speaking  of 
4he  order  of  the  resurrection,  he  gives  it  as,  "  Christ  the 
first  fruits ;  afterward,  they  that  are  Christ's  at  His  coming." 


What  more  misleading,  if  all  wore  to  rise  at  the  same  time? 

J 


.M.:a 


280        PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUKH  STATB. 


«) 


11 


11. 


i4. 


n. 
u.. 


Once  irtore,  ill  1  Thcss.  iv.  1(5,  wVieii  the  Lonl  Himself 
Hhall  <leHCi'n<l  (Vom  lu'uvcn  witli  :i  Khout,  wo  arc  told,  "  tins 
«leji<l  in  Christ  sliali  rlsi'^  iirA,"'  tlu!ii  tlu'  liviiit^  saiiiJs  Ixj 
chaugcd,  an«l  all  oaught  up  ttigji'tlier  to  iiu't't  tlu'  Lor4  in 
the  air ;  and  U^is  before  lie  appears  to  tlie  world  at  all :  for 
"when  Christ  who  is  our  Life,  shall  appear,  then  shall  ye  also 
appear  with  Him  in  j^lory"  (('<)1.  iii.  4). 

The  passage  in  llevelation  moreover  is  not  obscure. 
\Vc  have  «  vision  ;  then  the  interpretation  of  the  vision, 
"  I  saw  thrones,  and  ihey  §^t  upon  them,  and  judi^ment  was 
given  nnto>itheni-  and  f  saw  the  souls"  of  them  that  had 
been  beheaded  for  the  witness  of  JeSus  and  for  the  word 
of  God,  and  wliicli  had  not  worshipped  tlu-  ]»east,  nejtljer 
'his  imaj^e,  neither  had  re<-eived  his  mark  upon  their  foreheads, 
nor  in  tlieir  hands,  and  they  lived  and  rcii^ned  with  Christ 
a  thousand  years.  IJut  the  rest  of  the  dead  lived  not  again 
till  the  thousand  years  were  finished."  This  is  the  vision: 
and  so  simple  in  character  that  the  interj)retation  repeats 
much  of  it  over  again,  "This  is  'tlie^  first  "resurrection. 
Blessed  and  holy  is  lie  that  ha'tli  part  ili  the  first  resurrec- 
^  tion :  upon  such  the  second  death  hath  no  power, ^but  they 
shall  be  priests  of  God  an<l  of  Cijrist,  and  shall  reign  with 
Him  a  thousand  years."  -m.  ■  • 

Thus  the  millenninm  is  literally  such,  and  tTO  resurredion 
te\  literdl,  for  these  are  given  in  the  interpretation  of  the 
vikion,  not  the  vision  itself  And,  after  the  thousand  years 
arc\  over  accordingly,  we  see  the  rest  of  the  dead  rise,  and  ^ 
h«r<5^ plainly  is  the  "resurrection  of  judgment,"  in  whjch  by 
thdrt'very  fact  the  saints  can  have  no  part.  All  is  thus  con- 
sistent, clear,  and  intelligible.     For  all  is  true. 

There  is  little  said  as  to  the  resurrection  of  the  unjust  in 
Scripture;  The  fact  is  affirmed.  Tlni  nature  of  it  is 
nowhere  spoken  of     It  would  seem  therefore  the  only  pos- 

',„':r'  ;      ■ — ^ — ^ — — ^^-— 

*  fir.  Carson,  in  a  violent  attack,  more  mo,  on  pre-inillennialism,  has     ^ 
urged  against  literal  r«Kuneot ion,  that  we  cannot  say, "the  souls  of " 
people,  without  meaning  literal  souls.     Bui  it  is  an  entire  mistake,  as 
we  have  seen  long  ago      Tt  is  a  very  offmmon  llfhrais^n.  ~~ 


VTE. 

(I  HiinHolf 
told,  "  tlu5 

;  suiiits  Im; 

II?  Lor4  in 
at  all :  for 

mil  yc!  also 

^  obscure, 
'ho  vision. 
i',uu'nt  was 
II  that  had 
•  the -word 
!»st,  nci-felier 
'  foreheads, 
kvlth  €hrist 
I  not  again 
the  vision: 
ion  repeats 
.'surrectton. 
it  resurrcc- 
ir,Jbut  tliejf 
reign  with 

esurrec'tion 
ion  of  the 
tsand  years 
id  rise,  and  ;. 
n  whjch  by 
is  thus  con- 

le  unjust  in 
e  of  it  is 
le  only  pos- 

eunialisrn,  has 
the  souls  of" 
re  mistake,  as 


TlIK   KKSLUUIC'TION'    OF   .IIIU<»MKNT. 


-% 


iM. 


287 


sible  thlnn;  to  say  nothing  about  it.  Hut  as  Mr.  Constablo 
proclaims  it  a  i»oint  "of  prime  conseciuence ."  to  know  tho 
tuirevealed,  and  has  \Vntleu  rather  a  long  chapter  upon  it 
in  hiis  work  so  often  cited,*  we  must  m^eds  follow  him  into 
the  darkiu'ss.  His  argmneft4s  apply  so  jittle  really  to  the 
view  (»f  tlrings  which  we  have  taken,  that  we  need  dwell 
comi)aratively  on  v<'ry  few  of  them.    ' 

He  first  of  all  professes  l>is  firm. belief  in  the  resurrection 
of  the  wick»'d,  but  holds  that  they  are  raised  to  die  again. 
Hen*  lie  is  opposed  to  Scripture  as  we  have  si-qn.  In  Scrip- 
ture .resurrect  ion  is  the  final  endof  death,  for  ''  it  is  appoint- 
e.l  unto  njen  o/,niio  die,  and  ^(/•/•r  this  the  judgment."  He, 
on  t!ie  contrary,  holds  ttiat  the  liodies  of  the  wicked  are 
raised,  "still  natural  bodies  as  they  were  s«wn,  resuming 
with  their  olHitb  their  old  mortality,  as  such  subject  to 
pain,  and  as  such  sure  to  yield  to  that  of  which  all  pain  is 
the  symptom  an<l  precursor,  physical  death  and  dissolution."- 
He  rests  this  conclusion  '' inainly  on  tht5  mipposition  that 
W)  chanire  passes  u[)on  thetn  at  their  resurrection  .  .  .  if  no  ' 
change  pass»'s  upon  them  they  must  needs  yield  to  the 
bitter  pains  which  accompany  the  second  death." 

He  urges  that  the  "  Augustinian  theorists"  p,dmit  this, 
and  so  have  to  alVirm  immortality  and  incorruption  of  the 
wicked  as  raised.  They  therefore  have,  to  apply  the  lan- 
gu'iige  of  1  Cor.  xv.,  where  the  corruptible  puts  on  incorrup- 
tion and  the  mortal  immortality,  to  the  resurrection  of  the 
ufagodly ;  and  when  asked  upon  what  grounds  they  do  so, 
they  answer  that  there  canjiot  be  a  resurrection  without  a 
chau'^c.  This  he  disproves  by  referring  to  Lazarus  and 
others,  and  as  to  1  Cor.  xv.  insists  that  it  applies  only  to  the 
resurrection  of  the  just. 

He  then  tiirns  aside  for  a  short  time  to  show  that  the 


resurrection  of  the  just'  is  the  only  one- which  is  a  fruit  of 
redemption ;  and  if  Christ  says,  "  I  am  the  resurrection  and 
Ihc  lifej"  He  thus  proclaimsllimself  the  source  of  the  "  res- 
surrection  ofltfe"  alone.    ^Ir.  Constable  identifies  then  (as 


*  Nature  and  Duration  of  Future  Punishment,,  cli.  viii. 


4H| 


ft 


•'!      I 


If 


1   ^- 


288         FACTS  A:<  1>  TUJiOltlKS  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  STATK. 

WO  have  done)  the  resnrrection  from  the  cleacl  with  this,  and 
further  states  that  the  quickening  of  tUo  mortal  body  is  «x- 
dnsively  confined  in  Scripture  to  the  just,  o.sp.'cially  rel'er- 
ring  in  proSf  to  the  "  if  "  of  Kom.'viii.  1 1 :  ''  //'the  Spirit  of 
Ilim  that  raised  up  Jesus  from  tiie  dead  dwell  in  you,  lie 
tliat  raised  up  Christ  from  the  dead^hall  also  quicken  your 
mortal  bodies  by  His  Spirit  that  dwelleth  in  you."  Thus 
"  the  resurrection  of  the  just  is  the  fruit  of  redemption  :  the 
rcsuri-cct^on  of  the  imju.st  has  notliing  to  say  to  it .  .  .  Christ 
cam6  to  g'lve'^io  M.''^  U'P  ^>^l>'t:h  should  force  everlasting 
exi^steftcil^on  myriads  who  asked  not  for  it,  anc^  would 
bun  it  wWi  ^11  thei^  hearts." 

Thus  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked  being  no  part  of  re- 
demption, Paul  could  not,  in  1  Cor.  xv.,  include  rt  at  all. 
This  he  proceeds  to  prove  at  length,  but,  as  we  fidly  believe 
it,-  there  is  no  fieed  to  follow  him  in  his  proof  He  con- 
cludes that  the  change  to  iqcorruption'  in  the  case  of  the 
wicked  is  essential  to  the  theory  of  everlasting  misery;  and, 
since  there  are  no  grounds  for  holding,  this  change,  the 
theory  which  requires  it  falls  to  the  ground. 

Thus  an  immense  argument  is  built  up  upon  the  two  props 
6^  ignQrcOice  ami  supposition.  Mr.  Constable  occupies  a 
number  of  pages  wit^  what  we  have  reduced  to  perhaps 
three  times  he  number  of  lines,  for  reasons  already  stated, 
"but  we  have  I  given  the  substance.  There  are  two  or  three 
considerations  which  hinder  out  acceptance  of  his  argument. 

We  grant  fully  that  the  resurrection  of  the  just  is  distinct 
in  character  from  the  resurrection  of  the  unjust ;  and  that  it 
is  the  former  alone  which  is  the  fruit  of  Christ's  redemptive 
work.  \y;e  shall  have  more  to  say  of  this  when  we  examine, 
as  WB  hope  to  do,  3Ir.  Birks' view.  We  fully  believe  also 
that  the  resurrection  described  in  1  Cor.  xv.,  does  not  include 
in  any  wa-y  that  of  the  wicked.  "  It  is  raised  in  power,"  **  it 
is  raised  in  ^lory/'  "  it  is  raised  a  spiritual  body,"  could  not 
apply  to  any  but  "  the  just."  '  Mr.  Constable  is  tvrong,  how- 
^ever,  upon  one  poip,t :  for  the  "  change  "  the  apostle  speaks 
of  is  not  said  of  the  risen-saints,  but  of  those  who  are  alive 


THE    RESUURKCTION    OF   JUDGMENT.  li89 

',■■■■  .       -^ 

and  remaining  when  Christ  comos.  "  The  <A'm/  shall  be 
raised  incorruptible,  and  we  "—the  living — •"  shall  be  chmujcd.'h 
For  this  corruptible  (applying;  to  tho  dead)  shall  put  on  in- 
corruption ;  and  this  mortal  (referring  to  the  living)  shall 
put  on  immortality."  Mortality  cannot  be  affirmed  of  the 
dead,  and  here  certainly,  as  in  1  Thess.  iv.  10,  17,  the  two 
classes  are  recognized.  The  "  ch^inge  "  appj^  to  the  living 
alone.  '^  ^'^  \,     -  ■  . 

We  dissent, from  Mr.  Constable's' view  of  the  matter,  in 
the  first  place,  because  his  ar^fximcnt  pnn^cs  too, niKch.  If 
the  wickesd  are  to  be  raised  in  a  condition  of  mort.ality,  it  is 
of  course  impossible  that  they  could  exist'forever,  that  is, 
in  the  JxHly.  But  it  is  equally  iin possible  that  they  could 
exist  for  "  the  ages  of  ages,"  as  to  wliich  certainly  Scripture 
affirms  their  torment.  He  must  reduce  these  indeed  to  a 
minimum  in  order  to  harmonize  them  with  his  theory. 
Nay,  more,  a  resurrection  which  is  a  mere  restoration  to  a 
present  condition  involves  certain  things  of  which  we  must 
all  be  fully  aware.  It  involves  the  being  sustained  by  food 
to  repair""  the  continual  waste  of  a  corruptible  body :  and 
thus  he  might  have  forcibly  urged  that  hell  would  be  soon 
"cleared  by  starvation,  except  upon  the  supposition  of  such 
a  supply  as  we  are  certaiiily  in  no  wise  justified  in  making. 
In  any  way  "  ages  of  ages  "  must  be  a  myth,  a  dream,  an  im' 
possibility  in  the  nature  of  things,  as  great  as  that  of  eternity 
itself 

.  But  again,  Mr.  Consta.ble's  view  ignores  the  true  nature., 
of  death,  as  I  have  shown  it,  a  necessarily  temporary  pro- 
vision in  view  of  sin's  entrance  into  the  world,  and  to  be 
finally  done  away,  when  "  death  and  hades  are  cast  into  the 
lake  of  fire;"  and  also  that  '■^  ajler  death"  is  "the  judg- 
ment." If  death  be  this  exceptional  temporary  thing,  it  is 
plainly  a  false  view  that  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked  even 
will  be  to  a  condition  of  mortality ;  or  thJit,  if  not,  it  must  be 
the,  fruit  of  redemption,  and  a  work  of  grace  inconsistent 
with  eternal  judgment.  On  the  contrary,  "  a  resurrection 
of  judgment "  it  is  expressly  sta^d  to  be,  and  not  grace,  but 


-    1  -■ 


si.: 


'U  > 


■r  I 


290        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUIIB  STATE. 

the  pursuance  of  the  original  creative  plan,  only  suspended 
for  a  time  and  for-a  purpose. 

This  in  no  wise, hinders  the  ''resurrection  of  life"  being 
due  to  Him  who  is  "  the  resurrection  and  the  life,"  for  the 
"  image  of  the  heavenly,"  the  likeness  of  Christ  in  which  the 
saints  are  raised,  is  something  immeasurably  beyond  whkt 
man  naturally,  if  sinless,  would  have  attained. 

That  there  should  be  difficulties  in  connection  with  a  sub- 
ject of  which  Scripture  says  so  little  as  it  does  about  the 
resurrection  of  the  unjust  need  not  surprise  us,  and  will  not 
those  who  consider  but  the  mysteries  which  surround  our 
present  life.  It  may  be  true  that  "  incorruption  "  is  not  the 
state  of  the  resurrection  of  judgment,  and  this  not  involve 
at  all  what  annihilationists  insist  upon.  We  know  too  little 
to  say  much ;  but  to  bring  our  ignorance  to  bear  against 
what  is  clearly  revealed  is  at  least  wholly  unjustifiable ;  and 
this  is  what  Mr.  Constable  is  doing  in  this  case,  -— 

Mr.  Hudson  has  somewhat  upon  this  subject  which  while 
we  are  upon  it  we  may  briefly  glance  at.  He  says  of  the 
unjust: — 

"It  is  hard  to  believe  that  they  are  raised  up  by  a  miracle 
which  ends  in  their  dqptruction,  or  that  accomplishes  nothing  but 
a  judgment,  which  in  this  view  must  appear  simply  vindictive. 
If  they  have  no  immortality,  why  are  their  slumbers  disturbed  ? 
But  if  their  resurrection  is  connected  with  the  redemption,  by  a 
law  that  finds  illustration  in  analogous  facts,  this  difiiculty  may 
be  removed.  Damaged  seeds  that  are  sown  often  exhaust  them- 
selves in  germination.  And  we  have  noted  the  fact,  thaf  of  in- 
sects which  pass  through  the  chrysalis  state  to  that  of  the  psycho 
or  butterfly,  many,  from  injuries  sufiered  in  their  original  form, 
utterly  perish  in  the  transition.  Now  the  Glad  Tidings  of 
the  Redemption,  quickening  and  invigorating  the  sovd  with 
new  life,  may  so  far  repair  the  injury  done  it  in  the  fall,  that 
even  the  unbelieving,  who  derive  many  benefits  therefrom  in  this 
life,  may  not  altogether  perish  in  the  bodily  death.  .  .  May  not 
such  truths,  as  food  to  the  souls  (>ven  of  those  who  do  not  cleave 
to  Him  who  is  the  Truth  and  the  Life,  cause  death  itself  to  be 
divided,  as  the  proper  effect  an^  token  of  the  Redemption  ?    And 


.;#^: 


judgment:  when  and  what? 


^1 


for  judgment,  it  is  as  if  the  unjust,  hearing  the  voice  of  God  in 
the  last  call  to  life,  should  be  putting  on  a  glorious  incorruption, 
and  should  perish  in  the  iw!t.  "* 

This  is  a  step  Ueyoiid  Mr.  Const ul)le,  and  it  seems  hard 
to  understand  how  in  this  way  tile  wicked  rise  at  all  Cer- 
tainly judgment  upon  tliese  abortions  would  be  scarcely 
possible.  Nor  is  the  resurrection  of  the  wicked  either  an 
effect  of  redemption  or  a  blighted  natural  process,  but  atr 
act  of  divine  power  alone.  It  is  "  God  who  quickeneth  thp 
dead."  Nor  again  docs  it  appear  on  this  ground  haw  th0 
heathen  could  ever  rise.  But  it  is  useless  taking  up  seriously 
what  must  be  the  idlest  of  speculations  •in  the  absence  of 
revelation.  Tliey  that  have  done  evil  will  come  forth  tb 
the  resurrection  of  judgment.  That  "is  revealed;  and  thajt 
death  will  be  over  and  ended  when  judgment  begins :  arid  • 
this  alone  completely  negatives  the  conclusion  of  amiHiila- 
tionism. 


CHAPTER  XXX. 


judgment:  when  and  what? 

We  must  now  proceed  to  what  comes  after  death.  And 
here,  before  we  can  come  to  details,  there  are  some  miscon- 
ceptions as  to  the  Very  idea  of  judgmeM  which  we  must 
examine  by  the  light  of  Scripture,  and  seek  to  remove. 

In  Mr.  Constable's  volume  upon  h^des,  so  often  referred 
to  in  the  earlier  stages  of  our  inquirv^  Ke  has  two  chapters 
of  considerable  importance  to  his  argument  which  we  have 
as  yet  scarcely  glanced  at.f  Their  subjects  a*^  respectively, 
"The  Time  of  Judgment"  and  "the  Time  of  Retribution.", 
The  general  object  of  these  is  to  show  that  neither  judge- 
ment nor  retribution  can  take  place  tmtil  the  resurrection,* 

*  Debt  and  Grace,  ]){>.  2G3.  264.  t  Chap,  xiii.,  xiv. 


m.  A^tr-p. 


w 


\>' 


ill 


m,\ 


-f ' ) 


«'!):,' 


292         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATB. 

and  we  shall  quote  some  passages  that  we  may  have  a«  clear 
,  view  of  the  issues  before  us, 

His  first  arguments,  grounded  upon  his  peculiar  views  of 
death  and  of  the  nature  of  man,  I  may  pass  over.  lie  next 
brings  before  us  what  the  Lord  says  of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah, 
Tyre  and  Sid/)n,  as  to  a  future  day  of  judgment  (Matt.  x.  15 ; 
xi.  '1'1\  Mark  vi.  11),  and  "  what  Ho  affirmed  of  these  hea- 
then He  also  affirmed  of  the  Jews  living  in  His  own  days. 
Moth  avQ  to  be  triGtl  rn  this  coming  judgment  day.  And 
what  He  says  of  the  Jewish  cities  of  His  own  time,  we  sup- 
pose  to  be  equJllly  true  of  the  Jews  of  all  previous  time.  .  . 
We  are  thus  told  that  for  four  thousand  years  there  was  7io 
sucli  thing  asjfuhjhKj  men  when  they  were  dead.'''' 

This  judgment  of. the  great,  day,  Mr.  C.  argues,  our  Lord 
tells  us-"  is  when  1%  returusr  frpm  that  right  hand  of  God 
where  He  now  is.  lie  jtells  us  this  in  His  parable  of  the 
talents.  It  is  'after  £i  long  time  the  'lord  of  those  servants 
Cometh  and  reekontHh  with  them.'  *  There  is  no  recjconiny 
with  yood  or  xoith  wiched  servants  until  the  Lord  comes." 

Mr.  Constable  goes  on  tp  show  us  how— ^ 

"  our  Platouic  theology  has  virtually  nullified  this  great  trutk  of 
Scripture.  It  hus  not  denied  iu  words  the  great  day  of  future 
judgment  of  which  Cluist  and  His  apostles^spcak,  but  it  has 
robbed  it  of  all  its  significance  and  meaning  by  telling  u*  that 
there  is  unotlmr  judyimut  ln'/ore  it  rt}hicJt  effect !i  for  every  man  sep- 
arately iiihU ihe final  judyme lit  has  to  do."  He  quotes  in  proof  of 
this  the  Roman  Catholic  "  Key  of  Paradise  "  and  Poole's  Com- 
mentary, the  latter  of  which  "tells  us  that  ♦  after  soids  by  death 
are  separated  from  their  bodies,  they  come  to  judgment,  and  thus 
every  particular  one  is  handed  over  by  death  to  the  bar  of  God 
the  great  Judge,  and  so  is  dispatched  by  His  sentence  to  its  par- 
ticular state  and  place  with  its  respective  people.  At  the  great 
and  general  assize,  the  day  of  judgment,  shall  the  general  and 
uuiv<}rsal  one  take  place,  when  all  sinners  in  their  entire  persons, 
bodies  and  souls  united,  shall  be  adjudged  to  their  final  unalter- 
able land  eternal  stJite.'  " 

Further,  as  to  retribution,  Mr.  Constable  quotes  2  Cor.  v. 
10  as— 


judgment;  when  and  what? 


293 


)tes  2  Cor.  v. 


•'  decisive  that  wo  retrijmlioa  mhntHoHmtr,  be  it  reward  or  puuisli- 
meut,  tiikuH  pltnH!  before  the  re.surreetiou  and  the  judgment. 
There  can  be  no  question  that  '  made  known  or  manifest '  should 
bo  the  "translation  of  the  Greek  verb  in  this  verso,  as  it  is  its  trans- 
lation in  the  next.  Bengol  expresses  its  s(^nao  when  he  says  that 
it  means  not  merely  that  we  should  appear  in  the  body,  but  that 
>p, should  be  made  known,  together  with  all  onr  secret  deeds.  .  . 
"The  judgment  scat  of  Christ  is  that  judgment  seat  which  He  sets 
up  whKn  He  comes  and  raises  up  the  dead .  .  .  not  until  then  mil 
retribution  take  place  ;  not  until  then  will  the  sinner  be  punishe(l, 
and  the  saint  receiye  his  reward  ;  /.  e.,  it  is  in  the  body,  and  not 
out  of  the  body  ^hat  retribution  takes  place .  .  .  Paul  w'as  here 
only  following  the  teaching  of  his  Master.  Nowhere  in  the  teacli- 
ing  of  Christ  are  His  disciples  taught  to  expect  their  reward,  or 
any  part  of  it,  when  they  are  dead.  The  very  idea  of  dead  men 
r('com2>onsod  is  enough  to  excite  scorn  against  the  school  of 
thought  which  has  taught  it,  until,  from  the  perpetual  repetition 
of  the  nons(>nsc,  we  cotild  not  see  its  folly.  But  not  to  the  state 
of  death,  but  to  the  resurrection  from  that  state  of  death,  does 
our  blessed  Lord  teach  His  people  to  look.  '  When  thou  makest 
a  feast,'  He  says, '  call  the  poor,  the  maimed,  the  lame,  the  blind, 
and  thou  shalt  be  blessed  ;  for  they  cannot  recompense  thea ;  for 
thou  shalt  be  recompensed  at  the  resurrection  of  the  jjist.  .  . 
But  are  there,  according  to  our  Platonic  theologians,  anyjjassages 
of  Scripture^which  do  directly  state  that  before  resurrection  retri- 
bution of  any  Ivind,  reward  or  punishment,  takes  place  ?  Yes, 
they  say,  ther  is  one.  Where  is  it  ?  In  Luke  xvi.  23.  'What 
do  these  words  form  part  of  ?  A  parable  !  What  are  the  words  ? 
'In  hades  he  lifted  up  his  eyes,  being  in  torments,  and  seeth 
Abraham  afar  off,  and  Lazarus  in  liis  boscm.' " 

lie  then  has  the  usual  objections  to  employing  a  parable 
to  teach  doctrine :  all  which  we  have  already  looked  at. 

Now  there  is  truth  in  Mr.  Constable's  obj'ections  to  the 
common  doctrine  here,  as  we  shall  see.  The  statements  he 
objects  to  are  not  clear — do  not  distinguish  between  things 
which  it  is  important  not  to  confound.  Especially  the  Ro- 
manist quotation  (which  I  have  not  given,  and  which  applies 
2  Cor.  V.  10  to  the  intermediate  state)  does  clash  entirely 
with  Scripture.  But  thvn  Mr.  Constable's  error  on  the 
•  other  side  is  as  plain.     He  meets  a  false  issue  with  a  partial 


I 


294        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  tO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


:'i: 


truth,  and  is  certainly  no  less  superficial  than  those  he  is 
opposing.  The  lull  statement  harmonizes  all  Scripture, 
parable  and  all  else,  instead  of  arraying  (mo  text  against 
another.* 

The  very  chapter  last  quoted  from,  as  we  have  seen,  bears 
witness,  not  in  the  last  parable  but  in  the  lesson  which  our 
Lord  deduces  from  the  first,  that  when  the  righteous  "  fail" 
(that  is,  at  death  therefore,  not  resurrection)  they  are  ''re- 
ceived into  everlasting  habitations*'  (Luke  xvi.  9).  And 
this  the  last  parable  shows,  in  whatever  figurative  language, 
with  regard  to  Lazarus.  And  it  is  in  exprcftfi  cimtnist  to 
this  that  the  rich  man  hi  hades  is  tormented,  as  he  is  "  com- 
forted." Thus  there  is  no  room  to  doubt  the  meaning  of 
the  solemn  words.  The  rich  man  is  certainly  2nctnred  (and 
even  Mr.  Constable  cannot  deny  that)  as  receiving  retribu- 
tion in  hades,  before  the  resurrection  and  the  final  ju<lgment, 
and  if  the  Lord  did  not  mean  tliat.  He  would  not  have  used 
words  which  every  one  must  admit  give  that  impression, 
without  one  word  of  warning.,  It  is  useless  to  talk  of  trees 
speaking,  etc.,  in  the  same  breath  with  this.  By  the  one  no 
one  could  be  deceived.  In  t"he  other  the  Lord  would  be 
coming  in  with  what  men  represent  as  false  and  heathenish 
ideas  actually  in  the  very,  mmds  of  Ills  hearers:  for  He 
spoke  to  Pharisees.  And  we  are  forbidden  therefore  by 
our  reverence  for  Him,  who  was  never  anything  less  than 
Incarnate  Truth  itself,  to  allow  that  He  could  so  trifle  with 
falsehood,  and  help  to  confirm  in  error  the  souls  of  those 
He  came  to  rescue  out  of  it. 

Thus  far 'as  to  the  parable.  But  as  to  the  righteous  at 
death  being  received  into  everlasting  habitations,  we  cannot 
so  ignore  the  direct  teaching  both  of  our  Lord  and  His 
apostles,  as  to  allow  Mr.  Constable  unchecked  to  assure  us 
that  we  have  no  other  Scripture  than  that  just  looked  at  to 
establish  such  a  doctrine,  Jle  may  believe  that  when  our 
Lord'  said  to  the  thief  by  His  side,  "  To-day  thou  shalt  be 
with  me  in  Paradise,"  He  meant  only  that  he  should  fall 
asleep  for  perhaps  two  thousand  years,  so  that  it  would  be 


■<<<- 


JUimMENT:     WUEN    AND   WHAT? 


295 


no  matter  to  hbn  whether  that  promise  was  kept  or  do  ! 
>(What  matter  to  ht'm  in<lee(l,  if  he  did  not  wake  up  for- 
ever? That  quiet  "sleep,"  in  which  the  sleeper  vanishes, 
altogether,  would  not  know  one  uneasy  dream  in  conse- 
quence !)  And  so  he  may  please  to  interpret  Paul's  desire 
to  depart  and  be  with  Christ,  and  similar  things.  All  this 
we  have  before  examined.  Hut  then  we  must  believe  that 
we  hftvo  some  Scripture  for  a  truth  like  thi^.  ►    , 

Mr.  Constable  may  say,  perhaps,  •'  I  am  stating  you  have 
only  one  Scripture  for  refrlhidion  in  the  death  state."  Wefl^ 
but  the  o)ie  i/iroloa/i  the  othf)'.  The  righteous  ffie,  and  the 
wicked.  If  death  be  extinction,  the  righteous  could  not  be 
"comforted"  in  it,  any  more  than  the  wicked  "tormented." 
Mr.  C.  himself  quite  rightly  puts  both  upon  the  very  same 
footing.  We  should  at  least  want  proof  of  a  difference,  if 
difference  indeed  there  were.  We  should  need  proof -that 
the  wicked  were  not  tormented,  if  we  were  assured  that 
the  righteous  were  comforted. 

Thus  every  text  for  the  one  is  an  argument  for  the  other 
also ;  and  when*  the  language  even  of  a  parable  comes  in  to 
sustain  the  prior  conviction,  we  "must  be  permitted  to  think 
that  it  neither  stands  alone,  nor  gives  an  uncertain  sound 
either.  We  do  not  expect  that  it  should  be  much  dwelt 
upon.  We  have  just  been  considering  how  little  even  the 
resurrection  of  the  wicked  is.  Enough  is  given  to  establish 
the  doctrine.  Warnings  and  ]>rorai8es  alike  may  be  expect- 
ed to  be  connected  rather  with  a  final  and  everlasting  state, 
than  with  one  necessarily  to  pass  away.  Yet  we  do  npt 
accept  Mr.  Constable's  statement  as  to  there  being  only  one 
text.  There  are  others,  as  Isa.  xxiv.  21,  22  ;  1  Pet.  iii.  19, 
20,  the  first  of  which  speaks  of  the  "  kings  of  the  earth  " 
whom  Revelation  (xix.,  10,  21)  shows  us  "slain  with  the 
sword  "  at  Christ's  coming  in  glory,  while  Isaiah  speaks  of 
them  as  prisoners  shut  up  in  the  pit,  to  be  visitfed  aftpr 
many  days;  i.  e.,  at  the  judgment  of  the  dead,  afler  the 
millennium.  While  the  latter  speaks  correspondingly  of 
those  disobedient  in  Noah's  days,  as  now  "spirits  in  prison." 


29G        FACTS  ANU  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  STATE. 

Both  texts  assure  us  of   retribution   in  "the   intermediate 

state. 

But  Mr.  Constable  wouM  allege  (loubtl<j8a,  as  be  has 
against  the  views  of  others,  that  "  retribution  before  judg- 
ment is  contrary  to  all  the  principles  of  the  divine  and 
human  law."  I  allow  it  fully.  What  lie  fails  to  see  is  that, 
as  far  as  the  settlement  of  personal  (jiiilt  and  condemnation 
is  concerned,  man— the  world— is  ALREADY  judgcd^already 
condemned:  a  thing  which,  if  it  be  not  plain  to  him,  as  it 
would  seem  it  is  not,  is  none  the  less  abundantly  plain  in 

Scripture. 

We  have  already  seen  that  God  by  the  ministry  of  death 
and  condemnation  was  for  centuries  pressing  home  upon 
man  his  lost  condition,  and  that  the  apostle  could  speak  for 
Christians  in  saying,  "  we  know  that  what  things  soever  the 
law  saith,  it  saith  to  them  that  are  under  the  law,  that  every 
mouth  may  be  stopped,  and  all  the  would  become  indlty 
before  God."  Is  that,  or  is  it  not,  a  sentence  of  God  ?  and 
is  it  to  be  passed,  or  passed  already  ?  Certainly,  it  is  long 
smce  passed,  and  this  sentence  of  the  law  was,  as  we  have 
seen,  only  itself  the  affirming  and  confirming  of  a  prior  sen- 
tence, of  which  every  grey  hair  in  man  was  witness. 

It  is  true,  man  might,  alas,  prophesy  smooth  things  to 
himself,  and  dream  of  being  able  to  face  God  about  his  sins, 
and  on  the  other  hantf  it  is  blessedly  true  that,  wherever 
there  was  real  bowing  to  the  sentence,  the  mercy  of  God  was 
ready  to  manifest  itself:  real  "repentance"  is  always  •*  unto 
life."  But  it  needed  no  judgment-seat  for  Ilim  to  manifest 
such  mercy,  wherever  He  knew  a  soul  had  bowed  to  own 
its  guilt;  while  with  all  others  judgment  had  not  to  be  pro-, 
nounced,  but  had  been.  This  is  w|j^t  raakes  so  solemn  and 
so  blessed  that  great  truth  of  EcclesiastiBS,  the  settlement  of 
the  question  of  the  book :  "the  spirit  shall  return  to  God 
that  gave  it."  Not  yet  indeed  the  judgment-seat,  where  He 
would  "  bring  every  WOKK  into  judgment,"  bid  the  assur- 
ance at  least  then,  if  never  before,  of  personal  acceptance, 
or  of  p&rsonal  rejection. 


,x 


jouoment:  when  and  wuat? 


297 


Mr.  CoiiHtttble  docs  not  see,— as  many  do  not ,— the  ditter- 
cnci!  betwet-n  thcvso  two  thiug-s.  W(;  muHt  look  at,  them, 
theretbre,  more  in  detail,  and  the  Scriptures  which  atiirm  and 
illustrate  tliem. 

Personal  acceptance  with  God  is  nhvku  on  the  ground 
of  our  works.  "  By  the  works  of  the  law  '—in  which  all 
good  works  are  summed  uj),— "shall  no  flesh  living  be  justi- 
fied." So  the  word  of  God  decisively  saytj.  On  the  one 
hand  not  the  most  perfect  upon  earth  (as  Job  was  in  his 
day)  but  must,  with  Job,  put  his  hand  upon  his  mouth  in  the 
presence  of  God,  or  open  it  but  to  say,  "  I  am  vile:  "  "  I 
abhor  myself,  and  repent  in  dust  and  ashes." 

On  the  other  hand,  let  any  soul  but  take  this  latter  ground, 
and  "if  wc  confess  our  .s/vw,  God  is  faithful  and  just  to 
forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteoas- 
ness." 


The  future  day  of  judgment  (whether  we  speak  of  saint 
or  sinner)  is,  therefore,  never  in  Scripture  for  the  settlement 
of  personal  acceptance  or  the  reverse.  We  have  already 
seen  that  personal  judgment  for  a  sinful  creature  before  a 
holy  God  can  onlf/  be  condemnation.  The  saved  are  saved 
bete  and  now,  and  do  not  "  come  into  judgment."  The 
doom  of  the  unsaved  is  determine<t'in  the  present  life  also, 
and  if  men  ignore  it  here,  the  spirit  returning  to  God  cannot 
remain  ignorant.  It  is  a  "  spirit  in  prison,"  already  with  the 
consciousness  of  wrath  upon  it,  if  not  received  into  "ever- 
lasting habitations."  This  is  the  rich  man's  portion,  where 
the  wrath  of  God  is  tlie  consuming  fire  by  which  he  is  tor- 
mented, and  yet  resurrection  plainly  has  not  come. 

Does  this  set  aside  the  reality  of  the  j^Lnent  to  corny 
By  no  means.  It  onl^^affirms  the  realit^Pf  the  judgm^i^ 
pronounced.  The  judgment  ^o  come  is  the  judgment  of 
works,  and  there  is  what  answers  to  this  even  for  the  saint. 
But  he  comes  to  it  in  resurrection  glory,  and  in  the  image  of 
his  Lord.  Can  he  be  put  u^on  trial  to  decide  the  fu- 
ture of  one  already  (jloriJiaU  Clearly  not.  But  he  does 
stand  before  the  judgment-seat  of  Christ,  and   receives  for 


if«!P 


mm 


298        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUllE  STATE. 

the  things  done  in  the  body,  as  a  question  of  reward  obtained 
or  lost.  Eternal  life  is  not  a  reWard,  but  the  free  gitl  of 
God  In  Ohrint,  and  justification  is  by  His  blood  alone 
Sonship,  meiubership  of  the  body  of  Christ,  a  home  in  the 
Father's  house,  are  all  fruits  of  the  same  blessed  work,  His 
and  not  ours.  And  these  can  never  be  brought  in  question : 
judgment  never  is  brought  in  to  settle  these.       / 

Similurly  then  as  to  the  lost.  The  judgment  to  come 
does  not  settle  that  they^  are  lost.  If  they  come  forth  to  a 
resurrection  of  judgment,  it  is  not  a  judgment  which  is  to 
decide  if  they  can  stand  before  God  or  not ;  but  they  are,  as 
the  saint  is  /io<,  "judged,"  themselves  personally,  "  accord- 
ing to  their  works"  (Rev.  xx.*'13).  'fliey  get  a  measured 
recompense,  as  the  saint  does,  but  a  recompense  of  judgment 
and  nothing  else :  "  few "  or  "  many  stripes,"  as  the  case 
may  be ;  an  absolutely  righteous  apportionment  for  the  sins 
committed  in  the  body.  This  is  the  Judgment  of  works,  as 
distinct  from  the  settlement  of  whether  lost  or  saved  as  is 
the  reicard  of  works  for  the  righteous. 

What  has  helped  to  confiise  the  minds  of  many  has  been 
a  question  of  prophetic  interpretation ;  and  k  helps  to  show 
how  little  there  can  be  a  thorough  settlerile^nt  of  the  ques- 
tion of  eternal  judgment  without  a  previous  settlement  of 
what  many  judge  so  lightly  as  "  th^millennarian  question." 
Failing  to  see  the  Lord's  coming  as  antecedent  to  the  nail- 
lennium,  and  the  purification  of  the  earth  by  judgment  in 
order  to  the  blessing,  the  separation  of  the  sheep  ft*om  the 
goats,  in  Matt,  xxv.,  has  been  looked  at  as  the  same  thing 
with  the  judgment  of  the  dead  more  than  a  thousand  years 
later.  It  ws^^  inevitable  in  this  way  that  the  latter  should 
be  supposed  (yet  in  :t)ppo8it  ion  to  the  plainest  passages 
elsewhere)  one  in  which  righteous  and  wicked  would  stand 
together,  and  the  former  be  discriminated  from  the  latter  T5y 
theiiwworks.  , 

itimould  be  plain,  however,  that  in  Matt.  xxv.  31-46,  we 
nave  a  judgment  of  living  nations  when  the  Lord  comes  to 
eanh  an4  sets  up  Hi^  throne  there,  and  not  a  judgment  of 


■".'^W  ■ 


judgment:    when  and   WHATVi 


200 


the  dead,  when '  the  earth  and  the  heavens  are  fled  away ; 
and  also  that  the  account  of  the  taking  up  of  the  saints  to 
meet  the  Lord  in.  the  air  in  1  Tliess.  iv.,  before  lie  appears 
to  the  worlds^^t  all  (Col.  iii.  4),  is  quit^Unconsistent  with 
such  an  interpretation.     There  is  no  hint  of  resurrection  in 
our  Lord's  prophecy  at  all.     And  the  nature  of  the  investi- 
gation differs  much  from  that  in  Revelation.     The  truth  is, 
that  "  the  nations  "  in  the  former  Scripture  are  those  who, 
after  the  taking  away  of  the  saints  of  the  present  dispensa- 
tion, and  during  an  interval  which  takes  place  between  that 
and  His  appearing  with  them,  have  received  a  final  call  by 
the  preaching  of  the  coming  kingdom.     It  would  be  too 
lengthy  a  matter  to  enter  upon  here.     But  the  broad  char^ 
acteristic   differences    between    this  and   the   Apocalyptic 
vision,  should  be  suflScient  at  least  to  prevent  their  being 

confounded.      _         ^  

J  Into  Judgment  he  who  now  believes  in  Christ  can  never 
come.'  So  He  declares.  ".4.<»  it  is  appoirited  unto  men 
once  to  die,  and  after  this  the  judgmei^,  so  Christ  was  once 
offered  to  bear  the  sins  of  many,  and  to  them  that  look  for 
Him  shall  He  appear  the  second  time,  apart  from  sin,  unto 
salvation."  If  "  God  has  appointed  a  day  in  which  He  will 
judge  the  world  by  that  Man  whom  He  hath  ordained,"  the 
saints  whom  He  declares  to  be  even  now  "  not  of  the  world  " 
even  as  He  is  not  of  the  world,"  shall  (not  be  judged  with 
it,  but)'  "judge  the  Vorld  "  with  Him  (1  Cor.  vi.  2).  They 
are  thus  seen  upon  the  throne  in  Rev.  xx.  4-6  as  having  part 
in  the  first  resurrection ;  and  not  till  a  thousand  years  after- 
wards does  the  judgment  of  fhe  dead  take  place.  God  has 
taken  care  to  separate  thus  widely  between  His  people's 
portion  and  that  of  those  who  hate  Him. 

The  truth  is  what  alone  makes  all  harmonious.    Present 

judgment  has  been  passed  upon  the  world-    The  very  cross 

itself,  as   His  portion  at  men's   hands,  has  only  confirmed 

finally  that^  sentence,  to  be  executed  when  He  comes.*     Out 

/^f  it  God  in  His  grace  is  calling  men  and  saving  them.    His 

^  *  John  xii.  31-8.3;  xvi.  8-11. 


300        FAOtH  AND  TIIEORIKS  A8  TO  A  MfTURU  STATIi. 

Haved  arc  upon  the  ground  of  Chi'mt  and  His  work,  not  their 
own.  The  unsaved  arc  still  under  th«!  universal  sentofue 
already  judged ;  tlie  judgment  of  works,  the  full  measure- 
ment of  eaeh  man's  due,  being  still  to  come.  This  is  not  a 
<luestiou  of  personal  acceptance  or  rejection,  which  is  on 
other  ground,  Imt  is  the  solemn  and  exact  awanl  of  dee* b 
done  in  the  body,  as  Scripture  says.  'Che  doer  and  the 
deeds  are  questions,  however  connected,  still  distinct. 


•^x 


.  ciTAi'TKu  xxxr: 


TTIK      DOOM    J)  F     SATAN". 

THEvery  personality  of  Satan  is,  as  everybody  is  aware, 
denied  in  m.-l^iy  <iuarters  in  the  present  <lay.  The  oidy  peo- 
ple with  wlul^we  have  to  do  jjist  now,  however,  who  deny 
this,  are  the  followers  of  l)n  Thomas.  With  these  iiven, 
self-consisiently  enouudi,  the  devil  is  sirnplNyi  persotiilltjitlon^ 
of  sin,  which,  however,  may  be  represent etTCpparently  l>y  J 
variety  of  IJ^'ing  agents,/in  wrder  to  get  rid  of  the  distasteful 
idea  of  sep!irat^4}erso.|iality  and  yet  meet  the  texts  in  which 
personality  js^ t/j&fi|^ani.fest  to '  1  >e  denied. 

I  may  be  allo3.vilHfc|i4li)/>mt  being  thotight  to  wander  too 
far  from  the  *^'di|l^H^^y^fo  lo<*k  brieHy  at  this  pouit. 

Now,  we  read  B^pwiP"'*'  ^^^^fej,.,*'"'*  who,  when  "the 
son?f  of  God  (wn(^;^:l<vi»n^'<ent  theirweTves  before  the  TiOrd," 
*'  came  also  among  them."  Tie  isex))re.ssly  ealle<l  Satan,  and 
is  a  true  "-<levir"  according  to  the  meaning  of  that  wor<l, 
•' a  false  accuser."  ^  ^' 

These  "sons  of  God '' are  spoken  of  by  .Tehovah  in  the 
same  book  as  present  when  He  lai«l  the  foundations  of  the 
earth  (xxxviii.  7),  and  therefore  are  certainly  not  men  but 
angels.  Among'these  :ingels  then  the  acrenser  (•otnes,ns  one 
of  them:  surely  not  a  man  among  angels,  and  hardly  a  per- 
sonification of  sin. 


'i« 

-^ 


;:i- 


UE   DOOM   OK  BAIAN. 


!0  of  the  X.onl  ho  go«8  fortli  to  exort;lHc 
uiuiaii  powor  aj^aiiwt  Job  within  divinely  or- 
limitx'.     lie  is  hero  clearly  on  angelic,  yet  a  fallen 
vil  beii'Iff. 

In  the  book  of  Revelation  wo  have  a  being  figured  as  a 
•  <lragon,"'  and  exjUaineU  to  be  "  that  old  serpent,  which  iu 
the  devil  and  Satan  "  (xx.  2).  "That old  serpent  "  of  coiirHe  1 
HbAjIrs  to  Eden,  and  tells  us  who  warf  the  real  tempter  hid 
under  the  form  of  the  irrational  creature.  Here  too  the 
w^tf-ds  of  the  Lord  ftpply :  "  He  was  a  murderer  from  the 
beginning,  antl  abode  not  in  the  triitli,  because  there  is  no 
truth  in  him.  When  he  speaketh  a  li^  he  speaketh  of  hitf 
own  ;  for  he  is  a  liar,  and  the  lather  of  it ''  (.John  viii.  44). 

As  a  tempter  we  accordingly  again  find  him  assailing  the 
Lord  in  the  wilderness,  One  in  whom  there  was  no  indwell- 
ing sin  to  seduce  or  personify;  and  there  too  he  is  called 
the  devil  and  Satan,  and  appear|i  as  one  who  claims'  the 
kingdoms  of  the  world  as  his.  And  he  departing  from  llim 
for  a  season,  the  Lor,d  speaks  of  his  return  in  a  wjjy  which 
suits  Ahis  obim  of  his:  "the  prince  of,tliis  world /t'ortii'^th^ 
fl§||liath  nothing  in  me; ''  and  of  His  own  'crosi/  as  that 
which  was  his  judgment,  and  "woubl  ensure  his  cast inj^  out 
(John  xiv.  80*,  xvi,  U,  xii.  31).  In  all  w}n<h  we  travel  tjidck 
once  more  to  E<len,  and  find  fulfilling  the  words  to  the  old  ^  -^ 
serpent,  "  He  shall  braise  thy.  head,  antfthou  shall  l^^^  hi^  w*> 
heel."  \  f  :■  -*•  '        '       "  ■     -.       /:•■■ 

We  find  hik  being  and  powerN»o  recognized  among  tfie"    ; 
Jews  that  tHe  J*hari8ee8  impute  the  Lord's  casting  out  of     v  a 
devils  to  Beelzebub  the  prince  of  th«>  devils;  and  the  Lord 
r«4mkes  them  by  asking,  "  Can  Satan  cast  out  Sati.ay'*  and^ 
recognizing  the  fact  of  his  having  a  kingdom,  asks  in  that T"" 
case  how  it  shalU  stand  ?    Tlic  devils  He  casts  out,  know  , 
Him  in  turn,  call  Him  the  Holy  One  of  Giu\  and  ^on  of 
God,  and^beseeoh"  Him  not   to  torment  them  before  the 
time. 

Everywhei^crfti  the  Gospels  the  power  of  Satan  is  a  thing 
fis  maTiif<™st  as  mnllirmiv,     A  wrrv.       ■  u-Myyi    i'.i:  'p  InT.-c'r 


.« 


m 


f3> 


0-' 


T 


0A 


■I    '. 


.  / 


4^f>|Sk;/^'i..),A-;,, 


(I 


() 


-,Vi      '. 

»        ■,!•'" 

K: 

■*.■ 


.« t.   V : 
'((-  ■>■■ 


''•*C 


302         FACTS  AND  THEOKIES  AS  TQ  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

eighteen  years,  and  it  is  Satan  that  has  bound  her.  He  pdts 
into  Judas'  heart  to  betray  the  Lord ;  and  in  the  apparent 
zeal  for  Himself  of  another  disciple  Christ  discema  Satan 
also.  He.  sows  the  tares  in  the  parable,  and  these  springing 
up  are  the  children  of  the  wicked  one.  Among  the  signs 
that  follow  those  who  believe  is  this,  that  they  cast  out 
devils,  "  '  , 

In  the  Acts  the  workings  of  the  same  ma^jgnant  spirit 
are  as  manifest.  Satan  fills  Ananiai^'  heart  to  lie  to  the 
Holy  Ghost,  and  keep  back  part  of  the  price  of  his  land. 
Cases  of  possession  are  still  noticed,  and  as  a  common  thing. 
Paul  speaks  of  being  sent  to  turn  men  **  from  the  power  of 
Satan  unto  God.''  In  the  Epistles  he  is  th'e  constant  adver- 
sary of  the- people  of  God,  whether  openly  as  a  roaring  lion, 
or  transformed  into  an  angel  of  light.  He  is  the  spirit  that 
works  in  the  children  of  disobedienee ;  the  god  of  this 
world  who  blinds  tSip  minds  of  those  that  believe  not.  If 
resisted  he  flees,  but  the  shield  of  faith  is  that  by  which 
alone  the  fiery  darts  of  the  wicked  one  are  quenched. 
"Shortly,"  we  are  reminded,  according  to  the  first  promise,^ 
"  God  will  bruise  Satan  under  your  feet."  , 

All  this  is  but  part  of  the  testimony  of  the  word  of  God  as  to 
the  reality  and  power  of  man's  old  enemy.  If  words  mean 
anything  they  assure  us  of  his  true  personality,  with  that  of 
numberless  evil  spirits,  "  his  angels,"  possessed  of  superhu- 
man power,  which  is  used  to  obtain  dominion  overmen's 
souls  and  even  bodies,  and  from  which  nothing  but  divine 
power  can  deliver.  I  need  not  pursue  this  further  now. 
But  we  shall  have  to  consider  some  common  mistakes  as  to 
..  Satan  which  it  is  of  great  importance  to  rectifir,  in  order  to 
have  clearly  before  us  the  Scripture  vieir^' 

Satan  has  been  considered  commonly  (as  one  finds  in  the 
Paradise  Lost  of  a  great  poet)  to  be  here  as  a  prisoner 
broken  lopse  from  hell,  into  which  he  had  been  cast  immedi- 
ately upon  his  fall,  a  hell  in  which  even  now  he  is  supposed 
to  reign,  iand  to  reign  there  eternally  over  fallen  spirits  and. 
lost  men,  the  divinely  appointed\tormenter  of  those  Avhom 


'El 


THE   DOOM   OP  SATAN. 


303 


he  has  made  his  prey.  For  no  part  of  this  is  Scripture  re- 
sponsible, and  its  grotesque  horror  has  been  tlie  reproach  of 
orthodox  theology.  What  would  be  thtmght  of  a  govern- 
ment which  allowed  its  prisoners  so  to  break  their  bounds, 
and  which  employed  the  chief  criminal  to  torture  the  lesser 
ones  ?  --.^ 

There  is  in  Scriptur©  not'tlie  sligntest  trace  of  a  reign  in 
hell,*  or  of  Satan  tormenting  anybody  there.  He  will  be 
there,  doubtle^  the  lowest  and  most  miserable  of  all,  but 
he  is  not  yet  m  hell  at  all.  Strange  and  startling  asit  seems  • 
to  many,  instead  of  being  in  Jjtell^iieas  in  "heavenly  places," 
and  instead  of  reigning  in  hell,  reigns  herey  the  prince  and  the 
god  of  this  world.       , 

Thus  we  are  exhorifed  to  "  put  pn  the  whole  armor  of 
God,  whereby  ye  may  be  able  td  Stand  against  the  wiles  of 
devil;  for  we  wrestle  not  against  flesh  and  blood,  but 
,  against  principalities,  against  powers,  against  the  rulers  of 
the  darkness  of  this  world,  against  the  spiritual  hostsf  of 
wickedness  in  the  heavenly  places"  (Eph.  vi.  11,  12).  Our 
translators  have  shown  how  foreign  the  thought  was  to 
their  minds  by  putting  "  high "  into  the  text  instead  of 
"heavenly."  But  here  the  devil  and  his  angels  are  looked 
at  as  the  antitype  of  the  hosts  of  Canaan  with  which  Joshua 
and  Israel  wrestled.  We  have  long  lost  the  type  in  losing 
the  antitype. 

But  in  Job  we  have  already  seen  Satan  among  the  sons 
of  God;  and  the  "  heavenly  places  "  were  surely  his  original 
%dwelling-place.  And  //'  his  casting  down  to  hell  has  not 
yet  taken  place,  he  will  be  still  naturally  there  where  he  be- 
longed by  creation.  Now  his  casting  into  hell  belongs  to  a 
time  plamly  yet  future  (Rev.  xx.  10),  and  everywhere  in  the 
Gospels,  :we  find  the  devils  anticipating  their  coming  doom, 
but  knowing  it  was  not  yet  come.     "  Art  thou  come  to  tor- 


*  It  may^have  arisen  from  a  misconception  of  Rev.  ix.  11.     But  the 
"  bottomlesjs  pit,"  or  "  abyss  "  is  not  even  hell  at  all. 

t  Alford.     "  Hosts  "  is  not  expressed  in  the  Greek  :  it  is  "  spirituals." 


.M^ 


304 


FACTS  ANI>  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


,  I,' 


1 


ment  us  before  (he  time  ?  "  they  a8k|   It  is  plain  then  that 
hell  cannot  be  their  present  ])ortion. 

The  binding  of  Satan  precedes  necessarily  the  millennial 
blessing.  How  could  there  be  righteousness  or  peace  in  a 
world  in  which  he  was  still  as  active  as  ever  ?  Immediately, 
therefore,  after  the  appearing  of  the  Lord,  among  the  other 
foes  that  are  dealt  with,  Satan  and  his  hosts  are  not  forgot- 
ten. The  fate  of  the  beast  and  the  kings  of  the  earth  is  first 
shown  us  at  the  end  of  Rev.  xix.,  and  then  Satan  is  bound 
and  shut  up  in  the  abyss  a  thousand  years.  The  account 
may  be  given  in  figurative  language,  and  is,  no  doubt,  but 
yet  with  perfect  simplicity,  and  Isaiah,  eight  hundred  years 
befoi'e,  gives  us  the  same  things  with  almost  equal  plainness, 
and  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  obvious  meaning.  For  **  it 
shall  come  to  pass  in  that  day,  that  the  Lord  shall  punish 
the  host  of  the  high  ones  that  are  on  high,  and  the  kings  of 
the  earth  upon  the  earth  " — the  two  classes  of  which  Revc: 
lation  speaks;  "and  they  shall  be  gathered  together  as 
prisoners  are  gathered  in  the  pit,  and  shall  be  shut  up  in  the 
prison,  and  after  many  days  (plainly,  the  millennium)  shall 
they  be  visited.  Then  the  moon  shall  be  confounded,  and 
the  sun  ashamed,  when  the  Lord  of  hosts  sK}all  reign  in 
Mount  Zion,  and  ip  Jerusalem,  and  biefore  His  ancients  glori- 
ously "  (Isa.  xxiv.  21-23). 

"When  the  thousand  years  are  expired,  Satan  shall  be 
loosed  out  of  his  prispn."  And  this  post-millennial  loosing 
seems  again  to  stumble  many.  It  is  evident  that  the  object 
is  to  distinguish  between  the  true  subjects  and  the  concealed 
enemies  of  the  Lord,  still  such  in  the  face  of  the  long  reign 
of  blessing  and  of  peace.  That  there  are  these  is  plain  from 
such  intimations  as  that  in  Psa.  xviii.  44,  45.  And  the  effect 
of  Satan  being  free  is  soon  apparent.  "  He  shall^  outn  to 
deceive  the  nati^s  Which  are  in  the  four  quarters  of /the 
earth,  Gog  and  Magog,  to  gather  them  together  to  batittlej 
the  number  of  whom  is  as  the  sand  of  the  sea.  And  they 
went  up  upon  the  breadth  of  the  earth  and  compassed 


m 


the  camp  of  the _  saints  about,  and  the  beloved  city;  and 


he  millennial 


'  QEUENNA.  305 

fire  came  down   from   God   out  of  heaven,  and  devoured 
them."  '  o       j 

Then  comes  Satan's  final  judgment.     "  And  thfe  devil  that 

deceived  them  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone, 

where  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  a^^  and  shall  be  tor- 

mentibd  day  and  night  forever  and  ever."  ^ 

^^^j|feerning  the  nature  of  this  punishment  We  are  now 

if^^o^tb  inquire. 


:^- 


CHAPTER  XXXII. 


■   --r-  GEHENNA.  ;..,'■ 

Gehenna  is  twelve  times  rendered  '*  hell "  in  the  common 
version,  and  is  essentially*  the  only  other  word  so  rendered, 
beside  '•  hades  "  already  looked  at.  The  rendering  has,  it  is 
well  known,  been  the  object  of  special  attack  by  Canon 
Farrar  in  his  Westminster  Abbey  Sermons,  as  one  of  the 
three  words  (the  others  being  "  damnation  "  and  "  everlast- 
ing ")  which  in  his  opinion  ought  to  he  expunged  out  of  our 
English  Bibles.!  '  ,  / 

Gehenna,  says  Dr.  Farrar,  "means  primarily  the  vaUey^of 
Hinnom  outside  Jerusalem,  in  which,  after  it  had  been  poV 
lut(jd  by  Moloch- worship,  corpses  were  flung,  and  fires  were 
lit ;  and  is  used,  secondarily,  as  a  metaphor,  not  for  fruitless 
and  hopeless,  but — ^for  all  at  any  rate  but  a  small  and  des- 
perate minority — of  that  purifying  and  corrective  punish-* 
ment,  which,  as  all  of  us  alike  believe,  does  await  impenitents 
bpth  here  and, .beyond  the  grave. 

"But,  be  i£  solemnly  observed  (he  continues)  the  Jews  to 
whom  and  in  whose  metaphorical  sense  the  word  was  used  by  our 
blessed  Lord,  never  did,  eithejr  then  or  at  any  other  period,  nor- 

*  Once,  referring  to  a  class  of  fallen  angels,  the  word  raprapooda? 
is  nsed  (2  Pet.  ii.  4),  ai>d  translated  "  cast  them  down  to  hell,"  literally 
"  to  Tartarua.*^  \    — • —, — 

t  "  Eternal  Hope,"  Serra.  3.  _  / 


H 


M 


h 


j^.<. 


306        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

mally  attach  to  the  word  Gehenna  that  meaning  of  endless 
torment  which  we  attach -to  'hell.'  To  them,  and  iu  their  styh; 
of  speech — and  therefore  on  the  lips  of  our  blessed  Saviour  who 
addressed  it  to  them,  and  spake  iu  terms  which  they  would  un- 
derstand— it  meant  not  a  material  and  everlasting  Are,  but  an 
intei-mediate,  a  remedial,  a  metaphorical,  a  terminable  retri- 
bution." 

To  this  is  appended  a  note  in  which  the  Jews  as  a  church 
are'statPed  never  to  have  held  either  (1)  the  finality  of  the 
doom  passed,  or  (2)  the  doctrine  of  torment,  endless,  if 
once  incurred.  For  this  he  quotes  various  authorities, 
among  otters  as  the  most  distinct  utterance  of  the  Talinud, 
one  in  which  it  is  said  "that  the  just  shall  rise  to  bliss;  ordi- 
nary sinners  shall  be  ultimately  redeemed;  the  hopelessly 
bad  shall  be  punishe4  for  a  year,  and  then  annihilated." 
In  aijother  placie,  "Gehenna  is  nothing  but  a  day  in  whiph 
the  imgodly  shall  be  burned." 

'  In  his  fifth  excursus  at  the  end  of  the  book  he  adds  other 
testimonies,  among  which  is  another  from  the  Talmud,  to 
the  eflFect  that  "  after  the  last  judgment  Gehenna  exists  no 
longer."  His  testimony  ^of  the  Rabbins  concerns  us  very 
little.  He  does  not  notice  the  views  of  either  Pharisees  or 
Essenes,  who  both  held  eternal  punishment,  as  Josephus  ex- 
plicitly affirms. 

Mr.  Hudson  has  made  a  similar  appeal  to  the  Talmud, 
naturally  laying  the  stress  upon  the  annihilationism  con- 
tained in  it,  that  Dr.  Farrar  lays  upon  the  restorationism. 
Both  allow  that  there  are  some  passages  which  may  be 
pleaded  against  these,  although  they  believe  not  really 
against  them.  I  do  not  lay  any  stress  upon  it,  nor  propose 
at  all  to  take  up  this  line  of  argument.  I  leave  it  to  those 
more  competent  to  do  so,  and  shall  confine  myself  entirely 
to  Scripture. 

It  is  of  Gehenna  that  the  Lord  speaks  when  He  asserts 
God's  ability  to  "  destroy  both  body  and  soul  in  hell." 
We  have  seen  how  little  the  text  can  be  made  to  mean 
annihilation. — It  would  seem  to  be  no  less  decisive  against 


Dr.  Farrar's  view.     iJideed  he  gives  it  up  explicitly,  if  to 


r-g^.-. 


GEHENNA. 


307 


be  taken  as  jmplying  that  God  will  put  forth  this  pow^r 
that  He  claims.  The  passage,  he  says,*  "  merely  attributes 
to  God  a  power  which  we  know  the  Omnipotent  must  pos- 
sess. He  can  destroy  the  soul,  but  it  says  not  that  He 
will.  If  any  think  that  this  is  implied,  it  seems  to  mp  that 
DO  logical  choice  is  open  to  them,  but  to  embrace  the  theory 
of  conditional  immortality:"  * 

But  surely  the  Lord  holds  out  no  vain  warning  here.  Iii 
a  parallel  passage  in  the  same  way  He  says,  "  Fear  Hun  who 
after  He  hath  killed,  hath poioer  to  cast  into  hell;  "  and  we 
certainly  know  that  threat  will  be  fulfilled.  If  He  never 
wills  to  do  this,  men  need  no  more  fear  it  than  if  He  had  not 
power.  And  how  strange  a  thing  for  the  Lord  thus  to 
claim  for  Him  a  power  none  can  deny,  and  which  notwith- 
standing  He  will  never  exert!  We  do  not  at  all  on  that 
account  believe  in  the  logical  necessity  of  annihilation,  but 
we  f^o  believe  that  God  will  fulfil  the  awful  warning,  and 
destroy  both  body  and  sotil  in  hell. 

Mr.  Jukes  indeed  thinks  even  this  to  be  for  eventual  sal- 
vation :  he  asks,  ' 

"  Is  not  the  '  losing  '  or  '  destruction '  of  our  fallen  Ufe  the  only 
way  to  a  better  one  ?  Does  not  our  Lord  Himself  say  more  than 
once,  that  the  way  to  *save  our  life  '  or  'soul'  is  'to  lose  it '  or 
'  have  it  destroyed,'  in  its  fallen  form,  that  it  may  be  re-created  ? 
These  last  words,"  he  answers,  "  should  of  themselves  settle  the 
question,  for  m  one  place  they  occur  in  immediate  connection 
with  those  other  Avell-known  words  as  to  'fearing  Him  who  can 
destroy  both  body  and  soul  in  hell.'.  .  .  And  yet,  in  the  very 
closest  connection  with  those  words,  our  Lord  repeats  this  self- 
same word  '  destroy  '  to  express  that  death  and  dissolution  of  the 
soul,  which,  so  far  from  bringing  it  to  non-existence  is  the  ap- 
pointed way  to  save  it.  "f  .-'-'''' 

But  Mr.  Jukes  can  scarcely  make  so  much  out  of  the  texts 
he  cites.  The  destruction  in  them  is  not  the  destroying  of 
the  body  of  sin,  or  of  the  oid  man,  with  whichiMr.  Jukes 
^1'^^^^  confounds  it.     For  he  goes  on  to  say,   "  Christ  * 

»  "  Eternal  Hope,"  Pref.,  p.  xl.     f  "  Restitution,"  Appendix.  y7l72. 


■  a 


308    -factsXni*  theories  as  to  a  future  state. 

saves  it,'aft' w&jhave  seen,  by  death ;    for  being  fallen  into 
sii^  what  i«  needed  is,  that  the  '  bod>r  of  sin  should  be  de- 
stiyod,  that  henceforth  we  should  not  serve  sin.' ">    This 
'.  .  is  not,  I  say,  the  destruction  spoken  of  in  Matt.  x.  39;  but 

the  Lord  is  speaking  of  oiw  t^fcing  up  the  cross— o?<r  cross- 
in  face  of  the  opposition  of  the  world.  Is  this  the  destruc- 
hon  of  Our  old  man,  or  what  really,  in  the  spiritual  sense, 
saves'  us  ?  The  Lord  is  not  then  here  speakirt}^  of  "  Josing.  our 
life,  or  having  it  destroyed  in  its  fallen  form,"  that  it  may  be 
re-created,"  There  is  nothing  about  either  destruction  or 
re-creatioii,  iii  Utat  sense ;  lie  does  not  speak  of  "  that  dej^th 
or  dissolution  qf  the  soul,  which  1^  the  appointed  way  to 

save  it."     '    ■— .  \'.  -     -    '  ,  ^   '.     ^     ^"^ 

Nor  does  Scripture  anywhere  speak  of  such  a  thing  eithei4 
bissolution  of  the  Soul  is  nowhere  mentioned,  nor  its  death 
>  as  a  way  to  save  it.     Similarly  as  to  destruction;  can  Mr. 

■  Jukes  point  out  one  instance  in  which  the  destruction  of  the 
souljs  the  method  of  its  salvatigjif^  ,  lie  cann^;  a'nd  his 
words  are  mere  delusion.  "  Christ  saves  the  soul  by  death," 
he  tells  us,  "for  the  body  of  fib*,  must  be  destroyed,"  but 
that  is  not  the  soul  lie  says  again,  "The  elect,  that  is  the 
first-fruits,  are  the  living  proof  of -this.  A  '  new  man '  is 
created  ip  them ;  and  the  '  old  man '  dies  and  is  destroyed 
wiiile  yet  he  in  whom  all  this  is  done  remains  the  same  per- 
'  s(m:"  But  if  the  new  man  is  created  in  people,  he  is  not  de- 
stroyed first,  to  be  created  ;  and  if  the  "  old  man  "  dies  and 
is  destroyed,  A<;  is  not  re-oroated  at  all ;  nor  is  the  pertion 
*  destroyed  in  whom  this  takes  place  either.     Mr.  Jukes  adds  ; 

^' it  is  pnly  the  riddle  of  the  cross,  that*' by  death   God  de 
.stroys  him  that  has  tie  )>ower  of  death.' "    But  then  is  he  that 
;  ^  has  the  power  of 'death  destroyed  also  in  order  to  his  salva- 

tion ?     Certainly  there  is  not  such  a  thought  in  the  pa.ssage. 
It  is  in  vain  then  for  hiin  to  seek  to  escape  from  the  force 
■    of  the  words.     What-  folly,"  indeed,  to  suj)^08e    the   Lord 
saying,  "  Fear  Him  who  is  ablf  to  destroy  both  soul  and 
T.nrly^  Wi  order  to  save  them."     No;   it  is'tfti possible  to  read 
J  the  thought  of  salvation  into  its  very  opposite,  the  awful  de- 


BlP.' 


"  OKIIENNA. 


809 


he  awful  de- 


struction hopeless  of  delivoranee,  jiint  because  it  is  God  who 
"destroys,"  and  destroys  not  to  save,  but  as  the  altennUii^e 
n/salmitlon.  Anniliilationisni  and  restorationisni  tail  alike 
and  fail  utterly  here. 

But  then  Gehenna  is  the  place  of  this  utter  <lestruction, 
and  though  the  terms  used  may  be  more  or  less  "  metaphori- 
.  cal,"  a  "  remediable  "  and  "  terminable  "  retribution  they  do 
'/K>^te9lch.        „, 

Not-  does  Dr.  Farrar  lit  tempt  to  produce  Scripture  to 
establish  his  position  as  t(i  Geheiuia.  It  is  the  Talmud  and 
the  Jewish  doctors  that  are  to  «ijkline  for  us  what  the  Scrip- 
ture means,  and  Dr.  F.  even  brin.i^s  in  the  thoui^dit  of  "  the 
pleasant  valley  of  llinnoni,"*  as  if  to  l)ear  its  f^rt  in  trans- 
muting darkness  into  light,  and  making  tolerable  the  wrath 
of  God  itself. 

"In-  tlL  pM  Tostanunt  it  is  m.rdy  the  ploasuut  viillov  of 
Hmuom  ((Uc'Hinnom),  subsc,,u(.jitly  .l.'secrat.'a'by  iaoLitry,"iiud 
•specially  iW^Moloch  worsliip.  ,,,..1  .lofili'd  by  Josiah  on  this 
account.  Used,  nccordii.K  to  J.uisU  trudition,  as  the  common 
sewer  of  tho\city,  the  corpses  «.f  tlu-  worst  criminals  were  flun^ 
mto  It  unbm%l,  and  fires  wen.  lit  to  purify  the  contaminated  air'! 
It  then  becanu;\i  word  wllicli  secondarily  implied  (i.)  theseven^st 
judgment  whichV  Jewish  court  could  pass  up(ui  a  criminal- -tlie 
casting  forth  of  hk  unburied  c<»rp,se  amid  the  tires  and  wcn-nis  of 
this  polluted  vaIKy\  an.l  (ii.)  a  punishmi-nt  wliieh—to  the  Jews 
as  a  hoay—nerer  nWnt .  an  t>ndless  punishment  beyond  the 
grave. "  \ 

As  to  this  we  have  sWn,  lu.weyer,  what,  the  Lord  affirms 
of  It,  in  a  threat  accordiW  to  Di».  Karrar  never  to  be  exe- 
cuted. The  destruction  of  body  an.l  soid  can  har<lly-],e  this 
side  of  the  grave,^nd  canntk  consist  with  restoratirm.  Dr. 
P^arrar's  words,  too,  are  contr^lictcd  explicitly  by  Josephus, 
as  is  well  known,  both  with  rejV^ird  to  the  Pharisees  and  Ue 
Essenes :  a  testimony  he  never  eVen  alludes  to,  and  which  as 
strangely  Mr.  Hudson  sets  aside  afi  inneliable  Rut  let,  uslee 
now  whence  the  Jews  dr.>w    (or  might   have  drawn)  tlieir 


*  Preface,  x.\xii. 


t- 


-i- 


\     V. 


:i'i!| 


Ih 


ii. 


Si!: 


i- 


310         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FITTURK  STATE; 

views  of  Gehenna.  We  have  the  Old  Testament  as  they  had, 
and  from  it  alone  all  right  views,  such  as  the  Lord  could 
Himself  adopt,  must  surely  he  taken.  Revelation  alone 
could  be  a  light  beyond  the  grave. 

To  one  of  these  Old  Testament  passages  (Isa.  Ixvi.  24)  we 
have  already  referred,  in  which  we  find  "both  the  fire  and 
the  worm  attributed  to  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  and  which 
more  certainly  ai'e  the  basis  of  the  well-known  warning  of 
our  Lord  which  we  must  almost  immediately  consider  now. 
As  millennial  and  not  final,  it  may  be  concluded  to  have 
given  risen  to  thoughts  of  the  temporary  nature  of  Gehenna, 
which  Dr.  Farrar's  extracts  have  so  much  of,  as  well  as  also 
to  have  furnished  argument  for  the  annihilation  doctrines 
of  the  day,  in  behalf  of  which  also  we  find  them  quofmg 
Mai.  iv.  1,  quite  as  do  the  present  anriihilationists. 

The  main  passage  beside  is  also  in  Isaiah,  and  here 
Tophet,  the  valley  of  Hinnom,  is  expressly  named  as  the 
place  of  judgment  for  the  Assyrian,  where  thfe  breath  of  the 
Lord  like  a  stream  of  brimstone  ^cindles  the  pile  (xxx.  ^3). 
Here,  while  the  literal  Tophet  might  furnish  the  terms  of 
the  prophecy,  the  language  points  to  something  deeper, 
which  the  fuller  revelation  could  alone  perhaps  make  plain. 
We  must  now  look  at  the  well-knov/n  passage  in  the  Gos- 
pel of  Mark  (ix.  43-50),  which  I  quote  in  full :  • 

"  And  if  thy  hand  oflfend  thee,  cut  it  off  ;  it  is  better  for  thee 

to  enter  into  life  maimed,  than^hftving  two  hands  to  go  into  hell 

[Gehenna],  into  the  fire  that  neVer  shall  Jt)e  quenched  [or  rather, 

the  fire  unquenchable],  where  their  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire 

's  not  quenched.     And  if  thy  foot  oflfe^  thee,  cut  it  oflf ;  it  is 

>etter  for  thee  to  enter  halt  into  life,  than  having  two  feet  to 

recast  intc/Tiell  [Gehenna],  ihto  the  unquenchable  fire  ;  where 

their  worm  dieth  not  and  the  fire  is  not  quenched.     And  if  thine 

eye  oflfend  thee,  pluck  it  out ;  at  is  better  for  thee  to  enter  into  life 

with  one  eye,  than  having  tWq  eyes  to  be  cast  into  the  Gehenna 

of  fire  ;  where  their  worm  diteth  not  and  the  fire  is  not  qftenched. 

For  every  one  shall  be  saltM  with  fire,  and  every  sacrifice  shall 

be  salted  with  salt.    Salt  i^  good,  but  if  the  saltlfeve  lost  its 


saltness,  wherewith  will  jh  season  it  ? 
and  have  peace  with  one  another." 


Have  salt  in  yourselves,- 


>.• ,  "^^^J*"" 


GEHENNA. 


.811 


,It  was  to  be  expected  that  annihilationists  should  have 
stumbled  over  this  passage  as  they  have.  The  admitted 
borrowing  of  phraseology  from  Isa.  Ixvi.  2 1,  and  the  word 
Gehenna,  with  the  associations  whloli  we  have  just  been 
looking  at,  are  taken  to  show  that  the  terms  used  in  these 
verses  imply  the  "  utter  destruction  "  (in  the  new  sense)  of 
the  ungodlyl 

Mr.  Constable,  appealing  to  the  passage  in  Isaiah,  s^s  : 
''  A  moment's  glance  shows  us  that  both  the  worm  and  the 
tire  are  alike  external  to  and  distinct  from  the  subject  on 
which  they  prey ;  and  also,  that  what  both  prey  upon  are 
not  the  living  Out  the  dead*.  .  .  These  most  solemn  words 
of  the  prophet,  so  solemnly  endorsed  by  Christ,  assert  a 
state  of  eternal  death  and  destruction,  not  one  of  eternal 
life  in  hell,  as  the  destiny^  of  transgressors  in  the  world  to 
come.''* 

Mr.  Minton  thinks  it — 

*'  difficult  to  conceive  of  any  two  images  that  o^fr  Lord  could  have 
put  together,  more  hopelessly  in'econcilable  with  the  idea  of 
never-ending  misery,  than  the  worm  and  the  fire. "  And  he  adds, 
"  It  is  contended  that  the  worm  not  dying  and  the  fire  nof  being 
quenched,  implies  the  continuance  of  being  of  that  on  which  ' 
they  prey ...  If  the  worm  could  di^,  or  the  fire  be  quenched,  - 
before  they  had  done  their  work  upon  the  body,  it  might  possi- 
bly be  rescued  or  left  half  consumed;  But  if  neither  the  ravages 
of  the  worm,  nor  the  burning  of*  the  fire,  can  be  checked,  then 
nothing  can  save  the  body  which  is  exposed  to  them  from  C0151- 
plete  extinction  of  being.  If  it  be  asked,  what  becomes  of  the 
worm  and  the  fire  after  the  body  is  consumed  ?    it  is  ptough  to 

J  reply,  that  we  have  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  that .  .  .  And 
«I  will  venture  to  say,  that  no  one  would  ever  imagine  the  idea 
of  an  eternal  worm  to  be  contained  in  this  passage,  if  they  did 
not  bring  to  it  the  assumption  that  it  is  an  eternal  being  who 
is  preyed  upon  by  it.  Without  that  assumption  the  image  is  as 
plain  and  simple  as  possible.  With  it  you  have  the  monstrous 
incongruity  of  an  eternal  worm,  and  of  a  human  body  which  is 

being  eternally  devoured  by  it,  but  yet  remains  forever  as  whole ' 

and  entire  as  if  the  worm  had  never  touched  it.  .  .  It  is  no  re- 


*  Eternal  Punishment,  \).  195. 


312        FACTS  AND  TIIKOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE «TATE. 

ply  to  Hjiy  that  tlu)  piiiiislmioiit  represented  is  not  merely  tlmt,of 
the  Ixwly  but  of  tht)  Hoiil  also,  or  even,  iiH  some  would  now  fcuiy,  of 
the  soul  only.     ForHho  figure  tised  to  rei)reMent  it  is  the  eon- 
sumption  of  a  body  by  worm  and  by  fire  ;  and  that  figure  docs 
reprosrnt  destruction,  but  does  not  represent  eternal  existence." 
He  further  refers  to  Jer.  xvii.  27  :  "I  will  kindle  a  fire  in 
the  gates  thereof;  and  it  shall  devour  the  palaces  of  Jerusa- 
saleni,  and  it  shall  not  be  <juenc/icd,''  which,  he  adds,  "  can 
hardly  mean  that  Jerusalem  will  continue  in  tlaraestwall. 
oternity."* 

Mr.  Hudson  again  says^  "  It  is  not  the  immortality  ^4he 
individual  soul,  but  the  muUitude  of  those  who  finally  .g^l<?h, 
that  challenges  the  nnquenched  fire  and  the  unfailirig 
worm."t  '  " 

Other  writers  speak  very  similarly,  but  it  is  not  necessary 
to  repeat  more  of  what  they  say  just  now.     The'  first  thing 
to  be  noted  in  answer  to  Mr.  Constable  is  that  he  makes  no 
difference  between  type  and  antitype ;  yet  it  is  scarcely  the 
literal  valley  of  Hinnom  of  which  the  Lord  is  speaking,  an<l 
as  for  Isaiah,  "  the  carcases  "  which  he  sees  a  prey  to  the 
worm  and  fire  are  surely  not  those  of  all  the  wrcked,  who 
are  only  raised  from  the  dead  at  the  time  the  earth  and  tlie 
heavens  fiee  away.     "  Gehenna,"  as  we  have  seen,  was  in 
point  of  fact  used  by  the  Jews  in  our  Lord's  day  in  this  fig- 
urative way,  as  the  Talmud  has  at  any  rate  shown  us.     The 
ty])ical  character  of  milleimial  things  also  I  have  already 
pointed  out.     Consequently  the  carcases,  fire,  and  worm  are 
all  the  figures  of  deeper  things.     Does  Mr.  Constable  even 
himself  suppose  that  all  tlie  Lord  threatens  men  with  is 
that  fire  and  worm  should  consume  their  carcases  ?    This 
would  be  infinitely  less  than  extinction  itself,  and  instead  of 
ifc(Bing  the  picture  even  of  destruction,  would  be  a  picture 
merely  of  what  would  happen  after  they  had  ceased  to  suffer, 
anihad  been  in  faCt  destroyed  ! 

But  then,  Mr.  Minion  argues,  we  must  take  the  words  at 
any  rate  as  a  figure  oi  aestruction,  not  of  eternal  existence. 

*  Way  Everlnstiri2,  pj).  .'><),  51 ,  5;^  f  Debt  and  Grace  p.  109. 


«     • 


GEHENNA. 


818 


«• 


flaraes  t«  all . 


he  words  at 
il  existence. 


Surely  nobody   colitendH   that   it  is  a  fi^irc  of  the  latter, 
'i  he  question  is,  is  it  eousistcnt  with  eternal  existence  ?  and 
t.  at   is  a  different  thinj?.     Now  material  destruction,  if  a 
fi-  ure,  should  be  a  figure  of  something  else,  and  not  of  itself. 
T1  e  material  should  figure  the  spiritual :  and  spirUnnl  de- 
^  Hti  'ction  may  be,  nay,  is,  entirely  consistent  with  continued 
"existence  of  body  and  soul.     If  the  fire  were  materialfirc, 
and   man's  body  the  prey,  according  to  its  present  consti- 
tution the  body  would  come  to  an  end.     If  the  fire  be  a 
figure  of  divine  judgmeilt,  however,  this  will  not  be  so  per- 
fectly clear;  and  as  a  figure  fire  does  "^sure^y  sp(?ak  of  this. 
I  have  already  so  fully  shown  that  the  destruction  of  the 
sinner  is  in  fact  not  annihilation,  that  I  may  be  excused  from 
Voing  afresh  jpto  the  proofs  of  this. 

The-  WKntenchnble   fire  may  have  been,  as  to  the  mere 

force  of  the  phrase,  unduly  pressed  by  those  against  whom 

]Mr.  Minton  contends ;  and  I  concede  fully  thnt  the  fire  in 

the   gates  of  Jeru'ialem  could  not   be  ''  everlasting."     He 

must  be  aware,  however,  that  "  everlasting  fire"  w  spoken 

of  by  our  Lord  elsewhere:  if  (that  is)  the  New  Testament 

has  any  word  for  everlasting.     But  if  he  Avill  look  even  at 

the  passage  in  Isaiah  once  again,  I  think  he  will  find  reason 

to  own  that  unquenched  fire  does  there  imply  at  least  |)er- 

petuity.     If  "  from  one  nejv  moon  to  another^  and  from  one 

Sabbath  to  another,"  all.  fiesh,  as  they  come  up  to  worship 

before  Jehovah, "  go  foJth  and  look  upon  the  carcases   of 

those  that  have  transgitssed  against"  Him,  ^///.s-  imi)iies  a 

perpetuity  of  the  awful  spectacle  surely.     And  the  words 

following  give  the  reason  for  this  :  ''/or  f/wh-  tror/n  shall 

not  die^  neither  shall  their  /ire  be.  queiiche<J,  and  they  shall  be 

an  abhorring  unto  all  flesh."     The  fire  being  unquenchable 

is  not  then  given,  as  Mr.  Minton  argues,  as  a  reason  for  the 

utter  consumption  of  what  it  preys  upon,  but  on  riie  other 

hand  for  its  abiding  before  the  eyes  of  all  flesh  SalJl>ath  after 

►Sabbath  and  month  after  month.     In  the  scene  whieli  Isaiah 

pictures  it  would  matter  little  for  the  carcases  themselves, 

whether  the  worm  died  or  not,  or  the  fire  were  quenched  or 


~:s' 


if 

it 

if' 


Hi) . 


•■11 " 
if' 

>3 


ilk 


814         FA<  TH  AND  THKOKIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKK  STATE.       ' 

not.  Their  bein^^  "  carcasen  "  doomed  them  to  destruction, 
apart  from  all  question  of  wor^i  and  fire ;  and  these  are 
Kuroly  added,  not  to  bring  them  to  any  more  speedy  or  cer- 
lain  end,  but  to  intensify  the  solemn  picture  of  judgment, 
and  their  being  *•  an  abhorring  unto  all  flcHli." 

Tlifts  eyen  as  to  the  passage  in  Isaiah,  Mr.  Minton's  argu- 
ments are  only  plausililc  when  the  words  he  comments  on 
•   are  divorced    frZmv^ their  context,  aiid  looked  at  as  mere 
'  isolated  expressions.     Take  the  whole  passage,  and  they  bo. 
.  come  worse  than  unmeaning.     For  worm  and  fire  make  no 
more  certain  the  destruction  of  a  carcase  fjlready  secured  l)y 
simple  natural  law ;  and  instead  of  being  given  as  hastening 
the   destruction,  the   undying  worm,*and  unquenched  fire 
give  assurance  of  the  perpetuity  of  an  awful  spectacle,  which 
abides  indefi,nitely'  before   the  eyes   of  ipen   month   after 
month.    ^ 

Still  more  do  the  arguments  fail  when  we  compare  them 
with  the  passage  in  the  gospel :  fc^  here  the  Lord  is  "plainly 
not  speaking  of  a  spectacle  before  the  eyes  of  others,  but 
warning  those  wbo  might  suffer  from  it  themselves.  In 
-Isaiah  it  is  "they  shall  go  forth  and  look,"  from  one  new  * 
moon  and  one  Sabbath  to  another,  for  the  fire  shall  not  be 
quenched.  In  the  other  case  it  is  in  effect :  J'\'ar  if*  for  the 
fire  shall  not  be  quenched.  And  a*  these  words  in  Isaiah  " 
announce  the  perpetuity  of  the  judgment,  so  must  they  do 
when  traffsferred  to  the  passage  in  Mark. 

On  the  other  hand  who  could  call  that  "  severest  judg- 
ment which  a  Jewish  court  (eveq)  could  pass  upon  a  crimi- 
nal,"—as  Dr.  Farrar  puts  it,—"  the  casting  forth  of  his  un- 
buried  corpse  amid  the  fir^s  and  worms  of  the  polluted 

*  Mr.  Tipple,  quoted  approvingly  by  Mr.  Cox,  says,  '  The  flame  of 
the  yalley  of  Hinnom  cannot  be  made  to  represent  the  awful  suffering  . 
ihst&fe  forsin;  it  can  only  fitly  represent  the  certain  <rowj»?mp<ww  of  sin 
to  be  feffected  by  thp  Mhai-pucHH  of  the  fire  "  {Eckocn  of  Spoken,  WorcU). 
Thoy  Were  to  find  tho  certain  consumption  of  sin,  without  sufTerinii! 
And  this  biicaust'  llio  fiivs  of 


res  of  Gehenna  were  not  lighted  to  inflict  pain  find 
anguish  !  The  same  might  be  said  of  the  burning  up  of  chaff*  and  all 
Other  figures  I    Cannot  a  figure  figure  anything  but  just  itself  1 


„V:;- 


j'    ^5*i^J  1»^,  ',, 


OlMENKA. 


S15 


valley,"  a  "  purifying  and  corrective,"  or  "remedial"  retri- 
bution ?  None,  I  think,  who  were  not  under  hopeless  bias, 
with  which  reasoning  becomes  impossiljlu.  Nor,  us  far  as 
the  Jewish  court  was  concerned,  was  it  "  terminable  "  either. 
Of  course  it  could  not  hinder  the  resurrection  of  those  whom 
it  adjudged  to  this ;  and  in  this  way  no  human  sentence 
could  be  eternal  or  irreversible ;  but  it  could  represent  this 
notwithstanding :  for  )a  final  sentence,  irreversible  and  not 
terminable  by  any  alter  human  one,  would  be  the  proper 
tigure  of  irreversible  and  eternal  judgment  if  divine.  And 
only  of  such  divine  judgment  would  it  h^  the  proper  figure. 
Dr.  Farrar's  facts  are  hopelessly  against  his  inferences. 

But  the  49th  verse  in  the  passage  of  Mark  adds  some- 
thing more ;  and  Mr.  Jukes  has  made  what  use  he  could  of 
it  for  his  purpose:  "Take  the  ordinary  interpretatioji,"  he 
says,  "and  there  is  no  connection  between  never-ending 
punishment  and  the  law  here  quoted  respecting  salt  in  sac- 
rifico.  But  as  spoken  by  our  Lord  the  fact  or  law  respect^ 
iug  the  meat-ofifering  is  the  reason  and  explanation  of  what 
is  said  respecting  hell-fire,—'  for  every  one  must  be  salted 
with  fire,  and  every  sacrifice  must  be  salted  with  salt.'  " 
Then  after  explaining  the  meat  oflfering  as  shadowing  the 

fulfilment  of  man's  duty  towards  his  neighbor,*  he  goes  on 

"  The  passage  which  we  are  cousideriug  begins  with  this, 
man's  duty  to  his  neighbor,  and  the  ^eril  of  offending  a  little 
one.  Then  comes  the  exhortation  to  sacrifice  hand  or  foot  or 
eye,  lest  we  come  into  the  worse  judgment,  which  must  be  known 
by  those  who  will  not  judge  themselves.  « For,' says  our  Lord, 
thus  giving  the  reason  for  self- judgment,  'every  man,'  whether 
he  likes  it  or  not,  if  he  is  ever  to  change  his  present  form  and 
rise  to  God,  *must  be  salted  with  fire.'  This,  may  be  done  as  a 
sweet  savor  to  God  ;  though  even  here  'every  sacrifice  is  salted, 
with  salt, '—for  even  in  willing  sacrifice  and  service  there  is  some- 
thing sharp  and  piercing  as  salt,  namely,  the  'feorrection  which 
tnith  brings  with  it  to  those  who  will  receive  it  But  if  this  be 
not  accepted,  the  purgation  m'ust  yet  be  wrought,  not  as  a  sweet 

*  The  meat-offering  applies  (like  all  other  offerings)  in  the  first  place 
to  Christ,  the  Bread  of  Life.     Is  this  what  it  signifies  as  to  JThn  ? 


■«,.* 


\ 


I.     ( 


■ttjt . 


A'\ 


il  _-■- 


I 


^1(B        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

savor,  but  as  a  siu-ofifering,  where  tUe  bodies  ore  biirnt  as  un- 
clean without  the  ciiiup  ;  '  where  their  worih  dieth  not,  and  the 
liri-  is  not  quenched  '  (th^  '  worm '  alluding  to  the  consuuipticju 
of  those  parts  which  were  not  l»iu*nt  \AW\  Are)  ;  '  for,'  in  sonic 
way,  '  every  one  must  be  salted  witlHii'e,' even  if  he  be  not  u 
sweet-savor  'sai^riflce,'  which  is  'salted  with  salt.'  >  But  all  this, 
so  far  from  teaiphing  never-ending  punishnaent,  only  points  us 
hack  to  the  law  of  sacrifice,  and  the  means  which  must  be  used 
to  distroy  sin  iul  the  flesh,  and  to  make  us  ascend  iiva  new  and 
more  spiritual  foiTU  as  offerings  to  Jehovah. "  ^  ;  '  '  ~ 

-  This  is  decidedly  a  new  interpretation.  Mr.  Jukes  throws 
Gehenna  and  the  passage  in  Isaiah  of  course  asi^ie  or 
else  applies  tlieni  as  type^  parallel  to'  thiir***faii>i^''8in- 
olfering  !  °  But  here  he  can  find  no  "  worm,''  so  he  iuvcntH 
one,  to  consume  what  the  fire  ought  wholly  to  have  burnt ! 
But  we  must  look  at  this  further. 

The  Lord  certainly  says  "  Gehenna."  Is  this  in  any  way 
connected  with  such  a  type  as  the  sin-offering,,  or  are  they 
not  in  every  sense  contrasts  y      ^        '  .  .        ^ 

The  siriiffering  was  a  thii^g  "  most  holy."  It  was  an> 
ott'ermii  /or  sin,  and  therefore  *' without  blemish,"  to  be  a 
fit  type  of  such  an  one  as  alone  could  make  atonejnent. 
The  fat  upon  the  inwards  was  put  upon  the  altar  of  burnt- 
offering,  and  thus  linked  with  those  sweet-savor  offerings  of 
which  Mr.  Jukes  speaks.  The  blood  on  the  day  of  atone- 
ment went  into  the  holiest,  and  at  ordinary  times  was 
sprinkled  before  the  veil,  and  anointed  the  horns  of  the 
golden"  altar  of  incense.  That  blood  made  atqnement  for 
the  soul. 

Dare  Mr.  Jukes  apply  all  thia -to  the  abhorred  Gehenna 
judgment  of  the  unholy  and  unclean  7"  Dare  he  include 
under  one  figure  the  One  who  bare  judgment  suffering  for 
others  only,  and  those  upon  whom,  because  of  what  they 
are  personally,  God's nvrath  abides?  Dare  he  connect  the 
"worm"  of  corruption  with  the  type  of  God's  Holy  One, 
wlio  therefore  could  (even  as  to  His  body)  know  noneV 
Will  lie  say  that  the  sui-offbring  figures  a  corrective  jinlg 


III. 


iDill 


nient  purifying, the  victim  offered  ?   •Will  he  make  the  blood 


-afe" 


ke  the  blood 


GEHENNA. 


317 


of  the  sinner  an  atonement  for  hi^  sins?  Carry  his  view  of 
the  matter  out,  and  he  must  do  all  this.  He  may  say  (and 
I  trust  would)  he  has  no  thought  of  carrying  it  so  far.  But 
then  the  whole  is  one  consistent  type,  and  a  type  expressly 
of  the  putting  away  of  sin  :  that  is  its  proper  force — its  use. 
If  Mr.  Jukes  is  but  applying  language  used  of  the  sin-offering 
to  something  wholly  ditterent,  let  him  say  so,  and  then  take 
scrupulous  care  how  he  does  apply  it.  But  what  he  says  is 
very  different  from  this.  He  says  distinctly  that  if  a  man  will 
not  judge  himself  about  sin,  "the  jmn/ation  must  yet  be 
wrought  as  a  sin-offering."  Now  this  is  what  in  the  very 
nature  of  it  he  could  not  be.  A  blemished  beast  could  not  be 
offered.  And  here,  if  I  take  his  words  in  their  simple  force, 
the  sinner  becomes  his  own  offering,  his  own  Saviour  !  The 
worm  and  the  fire  point  us  back  {o  "  the  law  of  sacrifice, 
and  the  means  which  must  be  used  to  destroy  sin  in  the 
flesh,  and  to  make  us  ascend  in  anew  and  more  spiritual 
tftrm  as  offerings  to  Jehovah ! ''  r/m         ^ 

i'Siip  in  the  flesh"  is  just  what  the  sin-offering  did  not, 
and  could  not,  typify,  but  thi;  very  opposite,  a  Holy  One 
bearing  sin  not  His  own.  *And  therefore,  while  the  fire 
had  its  place,  for  the  AVrath^of  God  Christ  bbre  for  us,  the 
"  worhti,"  bred  of  corruption,  could  not  possibly  enter  into 
such  a  figure.  In  Gehenna  there  are  both  :  the  torment  of 
God's  wrath  upon  sin,  but  the  torment  also  bred  of  the  cor- 
niptlon  within..  The  two  things  are  essentially  and  wholly 
distinct.  Even  as  to  jthe  body  God's  Holy  One  could  not 
see  corruption :  and  these  are  types,  whose  significance  and 
power  become  more  and  more  realized  the  more  we  consider 
them.-  Gehenna  judgment  and  the  sin-offering  are  in  their 
nature  opposed. 

"  Every  one  must  be  salted  with  fire,"*  the  Lord  says. 


*  Morris  and  Goodwyn  prefer  another  rendering :  "  But  the  word 
'  pas  '  in  the  Greek  may  mean  every  one  permn  or  every  one  thiiKj,  and 
the  word  for  fire  is  in  the  dative,  pvri  /and  the  real  force  of  tlio  pas- 
sage  is  this  :  •  For  every  one  sliall  be  salted  to  or  for  the  lire  (that  is. 


\'::i 


i: 

'ill 


'■■■■    ■" 

l 


I  ■'. 


■5 


Jill 


»:  1,; 


318        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

Mr.  Jukes  adds,  "  if?ie  is  ever  to  change  his  present  form  and 
rise  to  God,'^  and  thus  assumes  his  whole  ground.  There 
is  nothing  of  this  expressed  or  implied  in  the  passage. 
"  Every  one  must  be  salted  with  tire ;  and  every  sacrifice 
must  be  salted  with  salt."  Here  salting  with  fire  and  with 
salt  are  distinguished.  Salting  is  the  figure  of  preservation. 
"Salt,"  which,  as  the  Lord  says,  "  is  good,"  and  always ^as 
a  good  meaning  in  Scripture,  is  the  figure  of  that  energy  of 
holiness  which  preserves  for  God  by  keeping  out  corruption. 
But  salting  with /re  is  a  widely  different  thing  from  salting 
with  sa/<,  fire  being  as  always  the  figure  of  divine  judgment. 
Npiv  emry  one  (it  is  quite  unlimited)  shall  be  salted  with 
jire — even  the  saint,  for  he  needs  the  discipline  of  it,  and  it 
is  for  his  preservation  as  such,  and  salvation  (comp.  1  Pet. 
iv.  .17,  18).  But  the  ungodly  will  have  it  after  another  sort. 
To  them  it  will  be  "unquenchable"  fire,  because  of  evil  ever 
needing  to  be  kept  down  i  repression  by  judgment,  where 
judgment  alone  will  avail.  The  Lord  adds,  "  And  every 
sacrifice  shall  be  silted  with  salt."  There  is  the  point  of 
transition,  at  which  he  begins  to  speak  of  the  saint  alone. 
Mr.  Roberts  finally  has  still  another  sense  :  he  says : 
"The  meaning  of  Christ's  words  is  made  perfectly  plain  by 
Paul  when  he  says  (1  Cor.  iii.  1^5),  'The  fire  shall  try  every 
man's  work  of  what  sort  it  is,  and  irspiiy  man's  work  be  burnt  he 
shaU  suflfer  loss  ;  but  he  himself  shall  be  saved,  yet  so  as  by  fire.' 
Through  this  fire  of  judgl^ent  every  man  and  all  his  works  \^11 
pass,  and  this  fact  gives  the  strongest  point  to  Christ's  exhorta- 
tion ;  but  the  action  of  the  judgment-fire  is  only  preservative  on 
certain  kinds  of  men  and  work.  The  judgment  justifies  and 
-  makes  such  incorruptible ;  the  others  are  destroyed." 


of  the  altar),  even  every  sacrift^  shall  be  salted  with  salt  "(What  is 
Man  1  p.  93). 

There  is  no  ground  for  this  :"  ?ra5,  standing  dlone  as  her»,  can  only 
mean  "every  person,"  and  the  word  "salt"  is  jusi  as  much  in  the 
dative  (a/lz)  as  "  fire  "  is,  so  that  there  is  as  piuch  ground  for  saying 
"  salted  TO  or  for  the  salt.'"  Put  without  article  as  here,  itvpi  and  d\i 


are  both  datives  of  instrument,  and  exact  parallels  :  '*  salted  with  fire, 
"  salted  with  salt." 


iiii 


THE  APOCALYPTIC  VISIONS. 


319 


This  is  fatal  false  doctrine.  Mr.  Egberts  does  not  yet  see 
that  if  a  man  comes  into  ^ndgiaent,  judgment  can  never  justify 
him :  "'Enter  not  into  judgment  with  thy  servant,  O  Lord, 
for  in  Thy  sight  shall  no  flesh  living  be  juiitified."'  How 
could  a  man,  if  judged  according  to  his  works,  have  his  ^ork 
burnt  up  and  yet  himself  be  saved,  as  the  text  he  quotes 
says  ?  Plainly  he  could  not.  The  man  is  saved  because 
building  on  the  foundation, — on  Christ, — and  not  because 
of  itjhat  he  builds,  which  is  burnt  up ;  he  is  saved  not  "  by 
fire,"  but  "  throwjh  the  fire,"  and  in  spite  of  it.  But  this 
question  of  judgment  we  have  already  sufficiently  examined. 

We  must  pass  on  now  to  other  testimony  of  the  word  as 
to  the  final  judgment. 


,    CHAPTER  XXXni. 


salt  "(What  is 


THE  ArOCALYPTIC  VISIONS. — 1.    •      - 

At  the  very  mention  of  Revelation  there  is  a  well-nigh 
unanimous  exclamation.  The  cause  is  believed  almost  con- 
fess^;^^  hopeless  that  appeals  to  this  book  of  symbols  for  its 
support.  It  is  principally,  of  course,  with  reference  to  it 
that  Canon  Farrar  enters  his  vigorous  protest  ^gainst  "  the 
tyrannousj  realism  of  ambiguous  metaphors,"  and  he  is  only 
giving  ff^esli^  utterance  to  protests  that  have  bopn  again  and 
again  put  forth  by  writers  and  speakers  of  every  grade  of 
orthodoxy  or  ^ts  opposite,  in  every  case  perhaps  in  which  it 
ever  was  appealed  to.  In  this  regard  the  minds  of  many, 
who  otBerwise  listen  with  reverence  to  the  word  of  God,  are 
under  a  cloud  of  unbelief  which  forbids  their  seeing  some 
of  the  very  plainest  things  that  were  ever  written.  While 
we  look  then  particularly  at  these  Apocalyptic  visions,  let  uf 
remember  for  our  encouragement,  that  the  title  of  the  book 
is  *'  the  Revelation  of  Jesus  Clfrist  which  God  gave  to  Him 
to  show  unto  His  servants  things  which  must  shortly  come 


!v:r 


>B1 ;  ! '' 


I 


1:111 


FACTS  AXD'THEQIUES  AS  TO  A  FUTUUE  STATE.' 

to  pass ; "  and  that  He  has-  added,  «  Blessed  is  he  that  read- 
eth  and^  they  that  hear  th»  words  of  the  book  of  this 
prophecy,  and  keep  the  things  that  arc  written  therein." 
/Plainly  we  have  nowhere  else  in  Scripture  the  full  and 
orderly' detail  of  "last  things"  which  we  have  in  this  one, 
book  of  New  Testament  prophecy, -the  priceless  gift  of  a 
love  so,  little  realized,  for  which  we  have -been  so  little 
thankful.  Nowhere,  are'  eternal  things  so  vividly  pictured 
to  us,  " the  city  which  hath  foundations"  on  the  one  side, 
^the  awful  solemnity  of  the  '^ lake  of  fire"  upon  the  other. 
Glad  would  Satan  be  to  withdraw  from  us  the  joys  which 
beckon  us  forward  in  it,  the  judgments  which  warn  men  to 
accept.the  grace  that  naw  beseeches.  Has  God  written  it 
so  badlras  to  be  .unintelligible  ?  Are  the  metaphors  am- 
biguous ?  Shall  we  not  at  least  look,  into  it  earnestly  and 
reverently,  before  we  thus  dishonor  the  blessed  Master  and 
Lord  who  caUs  it  His  "  Revelation"? 

k    .  •     -^  ■■  .,■./"  ■    ■  ■■:,-■■    ,  ■  ■       n    ■■ 

e  have  already  traced  the  outline  of  the  19th  chapter, 
and  iia^vd  seen  how,  after  the  marriage  of  the  Lamb  in  heaven, 
the  armies' thfere,  clothed  in  the  fine  linen,  clean  and  white, 
which  is  tie  righteousness  of  saints,  follow  the  white-horsed 
Leaderto  the  judgment  of  the  earth.  The  beast,.the  felse 
prophet,  and  the  kings  of  the  earth  with  their  armies,  are  the 
objects  of  the  judgment.  The  mass  are  slain  with  the 
swofd,  two  beingXexempted  ftom  this  to  share  a  special 
doom,'being  "  cast  aUyje  into  a  lake  of  fire  burning  with  Mm 

'stone."  .  \  ' -'"     ';   "         ,':  J    r  . 

'  The  ^next  chapter  shoVs  us  Satan  bound  and  shut  up  m 
the  bottomless  pit  a  thousa^  years^  while  for  the  same  time 
Christ  and  his  saints  reign  together,  the  \vicked  dead  not  yet 

being  raised.  •  \     - 

M  the  end  of  the  thousand  yWs  Satan  is  loosed  out  of 
his  prison,  and  after  having  decetXed  tlje  nations,  and  the 
iudgment  of  God  overtaking  his  follWej?s,hc  is  again  t^ken, 

-     lake  of  .fir^     there  we  are  told 


THE   APOCALYPTIC   VISIONS. 


321 


cast  in, "  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are,"*  and  it'is  added 
of  thenif  "and  they  shall  be  tormented  .day  and  night  unto 
the  ages  of  ages  "  (vcrr.  10):  , 

No\jr,  if  the  lake  of  fire  be  extinction,  how  is  it  that  two 
men  repiain  in  it  a  thousand  years  unannihilated,  and  that 
then  we  are  told  they  are  to  be  further  tormented  for  eter- 
nity? The  expression  is  "unto  the  ages  of  ages,"  one  of 
the  strongest  expressions  ever  used  for  eternity,  as  we  have 
seen;  and,  if  it  were  not  so,  as  far  as  annihilationism  is  6on- 
eerned,  the  use  of  such  languagte  would  at  all  events  pre- 
clude the  possibility  of  reasoning,  as  this  class  of  writers  love 
to  do,  from  the  nature  of  fire,  and  the  present  constitution  of 
human  bodies,  that  it  must  imply  the  total  consumption  of 
♦  those  condemned  to  it.  For  if  a  man  could  live  there  a 
thousand  years^  why  not  ever  so  many  thousand?  if  *  for 
ages  of  ages,  why  not  for  a  proper  eternity  ? 

Details  we  are  not  now  attempting,  but  only  seeking  to 
g^t  hold  in  the.  first  place  of  the  general  outline  of  what  is 
here  presented,  and  presented  with  abundant  plainness.  It 
is  not  from  any  peculiar  difficulty  in  these  chapters  indeed,> 
that  people  stumble  at  them,  but  simply  because  they  do 
'  not  harmonize  with  the  views  they  have  elsewhere  learned. 
V  But  the"  plainest  reading  of  these  Scriptures  is  what  is  in 
most  real  harmony  with  all  others.  We  have  assured  our- 
selves of  this  in  part  already.  We.  may  yet  find  equal  as- 
surance as  to  all  here  pre8entie<l.      x 

Map,  unsaved  man,  then,  here  shares  the  destiny  appointed 
for  the  devil  and  his  angels.  That  destiny  is ''' everlasting 
punishment "  in  "  eve;rlasting  fire.'"  Quite.'true,  we  have  not 
as  yet  seen  all  the  unsaved  sharing  it.     But  that  this  twen- 

,^  ♦  "Are  "  is  not  in  the  original,  but  riece.ssarily  implied  there.  The 
word  ''  they  "  is  also  oniStted  in  the  common  version  from  the  next  part 
of  the  verse,  wliich  ruiti,  "  and  shall  be  tormented."  The  difference 
between  this  and  what  I  have  given  is,  that  the  ordinary  translation 
'  seems  to  confine  the  torment  to  the  beast  and  false  prophejt,  while  mine 
includes  the  devil  in  it.  The  Greek  is  capable  of  ■either,  but  th^  <;on- 
nection  calls  for  the  sense -given.         '  *  *  .- 


.  i| 


«#■ 


V 


1! 


i 


322 


PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE*  STATE. 


tieth  chapter  gives  :  /*  And  whosoever  was  not  fouu^  written 
in  tihe  book  of  life  was  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire."  This  is 
^spoken  of  the  dead,  standing  in 'mass  before,  the  great  white 
throne.  ■  •  •  • 

tnt©  this  lake  of  fire  "  death  and  hell,"  or  hades,  are  also 
said  to  be  cast ;  and  people  claim  in  this  case  (and  many  un- 
thinkingly, too,  concede)  that  this  must  at  least  as  to  them 
mean  theiif  coming  to  an  end.,*  It  does  not  do  this '  at  all,  as 
we  may  see,  on  looking  more  closely  at  the  words.  "  And 
thejsea  gave  up  the  dead  which  were  in  it,  and  death  and^ 
hell  (hades)  delivered  up  the  dead  which  were  in  them,  and 
they  were  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works." 
Thus  death  and*  hell  were  emptied  i(it  is  "  hades  "  as  we-^have 
seen)  and  emptied  of  inhabitants,  who,  standing  before  God 
to  he  judged  on  the  ground  of  their  natural  responsibility, 
"according  to  their  works,*"  come  forth  only  to  hopeless 
condemnation.  Long,  before  have  the  saints  ceased  to  be 
tenants  in  hades.  Kor  does  Scripture  seem  to  speak  of 
death  for  the  saints  living  during  the" niillennium:*  Th 
result  woul^l  be  that,  as  none  but  the  "  blessed  **  have  part 
in  the  fipgt  resurrection,  so  none  but  the  wicked  have  part  in 
the  second.  It  is  thfe  resurrection  of  judgment.  And  it  is 
thus,  as  figUFatively  presenting  their  inhabitants,  that  death 
and  hades  arc  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire. t  It  is  immediately 
added,  as  if  to  show  that  the  people  are  intended,  "  This  ds 
the  second  death  : "  of  course,  not  of  death  or  of  hell,  but 
ofi  those  represented  by  them.  And  I  press  it  again,  that 
the  second  death*  is  the  lake  of  fire ;  not  extinction,  for  if 
there  has  been  no  first  extinction,  there  cax  be  no  second. 
Yet  so  the  first  death  (death,  as  we  ordinarily  call  it)  ponies 
•to  an  end.  The  last  enemy  is  destroyed.  The  second 
^eath  is  deathless,  and  yet  the  "ages  for  ages"  for  most 
fiave  but  just  begun.  ,        ' 

♦  Comp.  Isa.  Ixv.  20:  _^^ 

\  t  See  Isa.  xiv.  9  for  a  similar  putting  of  "  hell  "  (sljet>17  for  jts  inhab- 
itants.*  It  is  the  constant  thing  when  speakins^joftlties  :  "  0  .Jerusalem. 


that  killest  the  prophots 


etc. 


\  ,.  ..■ 


'\    ••  »• 


V. 


rSTATE. 


"  '  THE' APOCALYPTIC  fVlSIONS.    /     '  32^ 

If  would  seem  that  all  t^iH  was  clear,  slmjll  and  conclu- 
sive. The  metaphors  are  not  ambi«||j^s,  an^  l  their  « tyran- 
nous realisra  "  amomits  <n.ly  to  thi.^,  tiiat  t/h^y  are  in'  fact 
very  positive  in  whjrt  they  ri4)re.sent,  l.ocausfe  ^o  clear.  We 
shall  have,  however,  to  consider,  with  a  cari  ih  some  degree 
commensurate  with  their  importance,  the  ccim^ent.s  of  those 
who  read^'them  differently,  and  in  so  dofe| we  shall  learn 
the  f9rce  of  them  still  better,  and  find  wh^t  ambiguity  there 
is  in  them,  if  any.  /   .  / 

As  they  have  usually  preceded,  we  m/y  jive  precedence 
still  to  the  advocates  of  « conditional  imWrtality,"  and 
then  listen  to  Dr.  Farrar  and  the  restorkio^ist'school. 

W^  may  begin  with  xMr.  Dobney.    jua  ^ays  on  Bev.  xx. 

"On  the  present  text  I-  anbmit^(iy)  that  the  wi-itcr  simply 
affirms  that  the  devil  shall  bo  tormonted  fdre4?r  and  ever  •  which" 
whatever  be  the  legitimate  meaning  /cono/^ing  which  4e  need 
not  mquire)  no  one  dilutes.  [!J  *  At/lh  events,  I  am  not  disposed 
to  embarr^  my  present  8ul,joct  with  any  inquiry  into  the  fate 
.  of  faUen  angels.  .  What  I  have  undortakeii  is  sufficient.     And  so 
I  simply  remind  my  reader  thatWiis  text  says  nothing  at  all  about 
^mners  of  the  human  race.  /  (ii.)  Wfiatcver  this  lake  of  fii^e    ' 
may  really  symbolize,  it  i'^b^ore  the  gr^at  day  of  judgment  that  >' 
thedevil  IS  represenled  a^ast  into  it.     It  is  moreover  that  into, 
which  the  beast  and  the/also  prophet  were  previously- c«tst,  lon^ 
before  the  final  close  c/human  history/     Now  the  beast  and  false  . 
prophet  are  not  mOtviAwi]  and  historical  persons  really.*  They 
aresymbolicper^s.     ^fnu/e.cposlt6fK  (ell  nHha.t  they  symboU^ 
a  system  whiplf  is  to  come  to  an  utt^r  end,  rather  than  partici/lar 
iadividuakX^so.theidt.iof  torment  is  not  to  be  literally/un^ 
(lerstoodr    But  tins  I  jptnrkplfdf/ef/U'.''*  ,  >     * 

^  fr.  Dobney  is  careful  not  to  commit  himself  tooti^ieh 
where  he  is  evidently  not  sure  of  his  ground.  The>.om 
of  Satan  he  admits-to.be  tormoht  forever  and  ever,  and  does 
not  want  to  '^embarrass"  the  doctrine  o?  annihila4n  by 
considering  it.     No  wonder,  because  Satan  hipiself  4  to  be 

'   destroyed,"  and  if  that,  may  consist  with 


r 


"'4 


.  /■■ 


M 


eternal  /torment. 


Script.  Doctrin«>,  pp. "220.  280^ 


if''  ■■■■/■' 


324        F^CTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FtJTUBE  STATE. 

it  would  "embarrass"  an  annihilationist.  '  But  then  man  is 
to  8har4  Satan's  doom :  how  can  Mr.  Dobney  refuse  to  con- 
sider Miis  theti  ? 

"Again,  (ii.)  no  men  are  concerned  \n  this  judgment.  The 
beast/and  false  prophet  are  personifications  and  not  persons. 
At  least  "  many  expositors "  tell  us  so,  and  Mr.  Dobney 
will/  accept  their  judgment  upon  a  point  so  immaterial  as ,. 
this !  Why,  Mr.  Dobney,  not  "  many  "  but  the  mass  of  ex- 
positors tell  us  that  eternal  torment  is  the  portion  of  men 
ai^o.     Are  you  satisfied  to  abide  by  this  ?    Surely  not,  if  I 

,n  believe   your  book.     Why   are   you   more   credulous 

lere  ?  ■ 

It  seems  to  be  immaterial  whether  or  not  two  me?i  are 
here  said  to  be  tormented  with  the  devil  forfevor  and  ever ! 
But  Mr.  Dobney  prefers  to  believe  that  the  personal  devil 
shares  the  lake  of  fire  with  two  symbols,  and  is  literallytor- 
mented,  while  they  are  figuratively  tormented  in  the  self- 
same fire  !  Surely  Mr.  Dobney  cannot  blame  us  if  we  read 
the  facts  the  other  way.  We  should  argue  that,  if  the 
devil  be  a  real  person,  and  th5  torment  leal  for  him,  his 
associates  must  be  as  real  persons  and  as  real  sufferers. 
But  he  does  not  tell  us  what  these  *'  symbols "  mean,  and 
we  must  wait  till  another  does,  before  we  examine  this. 
He  dwells  more  at  large  upon  ver.  11-15: — 

"  Orthodoxy  ingeniously  connects  this  IStli  verso  with  the  one 
we  have  just  considered,  and  pronounces  thus  :— 'The  lake  of 
fire  is  the  symbol  of  tlie  torment  the  devil  shuU  undergo. .  This 
torment  is  to  be  day  and  night  forever  and  ever.  Into  this 
lake  the  wicked  are  to  be  cast.  Therefore  they  also  are  to  be 
tormented  forever  and  ever  therein.'" 

To  this  he  objects  :— 

"  (i.)  The  inference  is  not  a  necessary  one.  Because  in,  the 
lake  of  fire  the  devil  shall  be  tormented  forever,  it  does  not  neces- 
sarily follow  that  quite  another  race  of  intelligences,  cast  into  the 
same  lake,  must  therefore  exist  as  long  as  he  does,  and  endure 


the  same  torment.     If  the  orthodox  use  it,  it  proves  too  much- 
forthem.  .  .  they  musi  affirm  that  all  men,  even  the  least^guilty, 


■IpE  J  APOCALYPTIC    VISIONS. 


825 


will  endure  preelsefy^tlie  same  tomlent  as  the  devil\  himself,  see- 
ing that  the  leasts  guilty  of  the  lost  aro  cast  into  |)recisely  tho 
sjime  tiro  as  the  devil.  If  they  shrink  from  thjs.  .  .  they  surren- 
der the  entire  ease.  If  it  may  produce  different  effects,  it  may 
torment  tho  one  and  desti-oy  the  other. "    '  v\ 

"  This  is  somewhat  more  like  argument.  But  to  it  \  an- 
swer :— >  _  ^  :  .    .  .v;;^     , 

Mr.  Dobney  is  not  putting  all  the  facts  of  the  case.  V^e 
have  seen  that  death  is  forever  gone  when  the  lake  of  fire 
(for  most)  begins ;  and  that  "  the  second  death  is  the  lake 
of  fire."  If  we  are  to  learn  in  any  way  therefore  what  the 
lake  of  fire  is,  wo  look  back  j>f  course  to  the  prior  account. 
We  find  two  men — we  must  take  them  as  such,  till  they 
show  us  otherwise — a  thousand  years  in  it  alive,  and  then 
the  dev]^  sentenced  with  thepe  to  eternal  torment  in  it.  We 
argue,  necessarily,  this  is  no  repetition  of  the  first  death ;  nor 
could  it  be,  for  the  first  death  is  over,  and*  not  existing  still 
under  another  jjame.  If  the  second  death  is  the  lake  of 
fire,  extinction  of  being  the  lake  df  fire  is  not.  Can  any  one 
show  us  the  fallacy  of  siich  a  conclusion  ? 

But,  says  Mr.  Dobney,  every  one  must  suflfer  then  "  pre- 
cisely the  same  torment  as  thedevil  himself."  There  is  not 
the  least  reason  for  that;  for  if  the  lake  of  fire  mean  tor- 
ment forever  and  ever,  all  may  suffer  that,  and  yet  in  almost 
infinitely  different  degrees.  "  They  were  judged  every 
man  according  to  their  works." 

Mr.  Dobney  is  thinking  and  arguing  really  about  material 
fire.  In  a  material  fire  for  eternity  it  would  be  natural  to 
say  all  would  suffer  alike— the  degrees  could  not  at  least  be 
very  far  removbd.  But  then  how  could  the  devil  suffer  in 
material  fire  V  Doubtless  it  is  a  figure  and  to  be  explained 
by  the  use  of  such  a  figure  elsewhere.  It  if  indeed  the  true 
ignis  sapiens^  the  discriminative  Wrath  o^MHod  which  must 
be  the  portion  of  all  the  impenitent,  yet  not  alike  to  each.f 
The  Lord  has  Himself  taught  us  to  speak  of  stripe^  few  or 
many,  of  judgment  greater  or  less. 

As  to  even  material  fire  and  its  effect,  it  is  not  conceded 


.\ 


•iMi 


w 


i  1 


Fill'  V 


326        FACTS  AND  THl^OEIES  A9  T()  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

that  the  devil  is  in  s?/c/t  sense  of  "  quite  another  race  of  in- 
telligences," as  to  be  less  susceptible  to  its  action  tiiaii  the 
spirit  of  man:  while  as  to  his  resurrection  body,  we  can 
argue  nothmg,  for  we  know  nothing  about  it.  But  material 
fire  we  may  be  sure  is  not  meant,  as  these  very  consider- 
ations show.  \ 

Mr.  Dobney*s  second  objection  is  -.-^ 
,  ,"  (ii)  The  inference  is  not  a  fair  one.  .  .  What  does  the  being 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  mean,  in  v.  14  ?    It  denotes  the  utter 

,,  ceasing  to  be  of  death  and  hades.  There  is  to  be  no  more  death. 
And  this  plain  fact  is  poetically  set  forth  by  the  striking  image 
of  death  cast  into  a  lake  of  fire  ;  fire  being  the  acknowledged 
symbol  of  the  prophets  for  destruction.  So  '  death,  the  last 
enemy,  is  to  be  destro^red.'  This  is  the  undisputed  sense  of  v.  14. 

'  When  then,  in  the  very  next  verse,  sinners  are  represented  as 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  is  it  not  obvious  and  legitimate  to  re- 
tain the  sense  necessarily  attached  to  the  symbol  of  fire  in  the 

*  verse  before,  rather  than  to  overlook  the  near  and  go  back  to  the 
remote  passage  ?  " 

This  olbjection  ha8%een  already  met.  It  is  strange  hca^ 
little  Mr.  Dobney  can  see  the  fallacy  of  anltrgument  whiph 
asserts  death  to  be  destroyed  "when  cast  into  the  lake  of 
V^^  fire,  and  yet  that  death  is  to  reign  still  in  that  very  place! 
It  is  quite  true  that  death  is  in  fact  destroyed  in  that  very 
way.  Not  as  if  the  fire  destroyed  it,  but  its  prisoners  being 
given  up  finally,  and  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  death  exists 
no  more;  but  thfit  is  not  what  casting  into  the* fire  as  a 
symbolmeans. 
Mr.  Dobney  reinforces  his  argument  by  reference  to  the 

^  book  of  life,  and  the  threat  of  being  blotted  out  of  it.    This, 
too,  we  have  lopked  at,  and  need  not  return  to  it. 

Mr.  Hudson's  main  argumept*  also  turns  upon  death 
and  hades  being  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  and  he  says  that 
if  Satan,  the  beast,  and  the  false  pt-ophet  are  immortal  in 
it,  by  parity  of  reasoning  deMh  and  hades  ought  to>^. 


"Death  and  hades, Symbolical  personages,  are  supposed  to 


*  Debt  and  Grace,  p.  213. 


3f 


^'^as- 


THE  ArOCALYPTlO  ViaiONH. 


327 


ceaso  from  being;  While  their  subjects/ the  dead '  .  .  .  .are 
supposed  to  be  immortal !  Who  does  riot  see  (he  asks)  that 
hades  and.thanatos  are  only  other  names  for  the  dead?". 
That  is  what  I  believe  and  contend  for,  and  that  the  pas- 
sage docs  not  represent  their  ceasing  to  exist  at  all.  It  is 
quite  true  they  do  so,  but  that  is  inference  only,  although  a  " 
sound  one ;  for  if  all  who  make  them  up  are  gone  Irom 
them,  thcf/  are,  of  course,  gone  too.  But  if  death  be  gone 
at  the  beginning  of  t%)8e  ages  of  ages  for  which  the  tor- 
ment of  the  lake  of  fire  lasts,  how  can  its  subjects  ever 
"die"? 

Mr.  Hudson  filso  regards  the  beast  and  false,  prophet  as 
symbols  of  systems,  and  that  they  must  comd  to  an  end  '^^ 
with  those  who  are  their  worshippcrsj-.but  this  again  is  not 
proved  but  taken  for  granted.  If  they  are  systems,  come 
to  an  end  for  lack  of  supporters,  how  are  they  tormented 
for  the  ages  of  ages  V  "This  might  be  said,"  he  answers, 
"of  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  as  impersonations, 
henceforth  without  power  or  worshippers."  Death 'might 
indeed  symbolize  that,  but  it  i^  t/ie  very  thiny  they  ik>  not  - 
suffer.  They  are  cast  "  alive  "  into  the  lake  of  fire,  and\e-  . 
main  alive  a  thousand  years,  and  still  to  be  tormented  on 
forever  and  ever.  How  can  there  be  life  in  systems  with- 
out power  or  worshippers  forever  ?  Mr.  Hudson  does  not 
even  himself  believe  it,  for  he  adds,  "  But  we  think  the  lan- 
guage describes  their  utter  and  irremeable  destruction  in  a 
dramatic  form,"imd  he  compares.'it  to  Isa.  xiv.  9-12:  that"^ 
is,  the  welcome  given  by  the  dead  to  the  dead  king  of 
Babylon!  ,  ;  .     . 

As  he  gives  no  reason  further  than  this,  we  have  not 
much  to  answer.  As  to.  Satan  himself^  answ^s  the  ques- 
tion, "Is  h^  mortal?"  by  saying,  'Hhe  prophecies  all  look 
that  way."  He  produces  but  two,  however :  one,  "  that  the 
seed  of  the  woma^  shall  crws^i  the  head  of  the  serpent;  "  the 
other,  Dan.  vu.  11,  12  !  His  proofs  are  perfecUy  conclusive 
as  to  the  imtenableness  of  his  position.  ^/ 


ii 

,13 


J 


328         FACTS  AND  TUEOltlES  AS  lO  A  FUTUUE  STATE. 

As  to  the  secoad  death,*  Mr.  Hudson  (juotes  various 
rabbinical  statements  to  show  that  for  the  rabbis  t^io  phrase 
.    meant  annihilation.    If  so,  it  would  only  .show  tliat  Scrip- 
ture in  the  most  decisive  way  reverses  their  judgment. 

We  will  now  look  at  Mr,  Morrij^'  view,  and  shall  give  it 
in  bin  own  words  :f  /  \  * 

"A  two-fold  destiny  iiwaite  the  devil— the  one,  political,  and 
<        the  other,  persoiud  .  .  .  the  dramutic  representutiou  of  the  per- 
-7    -^         sonal  policy  and  scheme  of  Satan  is  that  of  'a  great  red  dragon ' 
(Rev.  xii.  1-3).     In  the  doom  of  his  policy,  his  person  and  the 
persons  of  his  host  are  involved.     But  it  ia  the  personal  policy  of 
Satan  that  the  *  great  red  dragon'  moretjspecially  represents. 
And  it  is  the  great  red  dragon  that  is  caugl^t,  and  chained,  and 
cast  into  the  abyss,  and  is  imprisoned  there  a  thousand  year'-, 
and  is  then  letlodse,  and  is  afterwards  cast  ii^to  the  lake  of  fiii-. 
■  The  policy  of  Satan  as  we  have  just  remarked,  involves  his  person  ; 

t  and  so  the  tfoow  of  his  policy  involves  his  personal  doom.  But 
it  is  the  political  doom  of  the  devil>  or  the  devil  Q&  poUtically  con- 
sidered, that  Is  intended,  and  is  dramatiAilly  dcsdribed  when  it  j.s 
/  "^said,  'And  the  devil  that  deceived  them  {the  n'^ions)  was  cast 
into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  where  the  beas^  and  the  false 
prophet  are,  and  they  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  forever 
and  ever.'  The  passive  verb  in  the  original,  Arti»vwiV/iec«o></aj,  is 
a  plural  verb,  and  so  requires  to  be  read,  '  and  they  shall  be  tor- 
mented,' or,  as  divested  of  the  dramatic  dresw,' '  and  they  shall  be 
PUT  TO  THE  PBOOF  unto  the  ages  of  the  ages.'  That  trinity  of, 
evil,  called  the  dragon  and  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet,  shalH.. 
be  YojjreMer  involved  in  the  same  final  doom."  .\ 

In  a  note  he  adds,  ^ 

"  The  dramatic  force  and  design  of  this  plural  verb,  basanis- 
theesontdi,  is  not— thtfy  shall  be  tortured^  as  some  men  conn},  tox- 
ture.    As  we  have  noticed  before  :  That  the  the  verb  basanizo, 
and  the  noun  basanismos,  are  derived  from  basanos,  the  name 
,«,     ^  of  a  stone  found  in  Lydia,  ia  Asia  Minor,  by  which  gold  was  -tried 

fN^  — a  tOuch-stme.    From  the  hteral  meaning  of  basnnoa  came  the 

metaphorical  use  of  7w.sa« /smos— tliat  whieh  tests  or  puts  to  the 

proof. In  the  mind  of  n  Unman  in(iuisitor— both  ancient  arid 

modem — both  secular  and  ecclesiastical— this  word  apd  its  verbs 
X         r^      ,  ♦  pebt  and  Grace,  p.  178.         t  What  is  Man,  p.  120,  etc.  -, 


.  ■•  \ 


^^■' 


THE   APOOALYITIC   VISIONS. 


820 


QflA  its  verbs 


caiie  to  mean  tarlure,  and  torturiug  to  olicit  evidence,  to  extort  u 
confusion.     But  oven  in  tins  thcro  wu8  uu  end  proposed  to  bo 

\  "'^Iny  '"''"'^  "^  ""'  *"'^""''  '"'^^  ^'^  »"  *"«^  t«  the  torture 
;  itself,     llu,  torment  inflicted  .v,w,  ;>,v/.x.s«//j,  at  lemt,  a  means  to 

/    nn  end.  and  not  for  the  mere  sake  of  tormenting.  .  In 

i      common  diseoarse,  the  word  hasmiismos  and  its  verbs  came  to 

-^present  the  ,deus  of  ilainful  toil  and  great  bodily  affection  . 

aiKl  the  infliction  of  torture.     But  b..sani,mos  and  its  verbs  always 

iTt.i|n  their  raulical  meaning  when  u«od  in  relation  to  the  iuris- 

pn,d)^ce  and  penal  administration  of  (h,d.     The  feminine  symbol 

!h  .B=%lon  the  gi-eat.'  and  the  masculine  symbols  caUed 

the  bea^   and  'Uic  false  prophet.'  are  said  to  be  tormented  • 

tl.at  is.  the  sj^ste^ns  of  ecclesiastical  md  ot  secular  and  moral 

an  1  iff o  T""'  "f^  ^^'"^  '^'''^  ^-^P'^^^*'  '^'^  l>«  tested 
and  put  to  tiie  proof.  ' 

nm  Ihr  Mr.  Morris.     We  h*ve  all  these  words  in  the  J 
.     Mew  Testament.     Uadayos  three  times,  Matt.  iv.  24;  Luke* 
xvi.  23  28,  always  given  as  "torment;"  Ba6ayt6M6?  simiJ' 
arly   "torment"  five  times,  Rev.  ix.  5 ;  xiv.  11;  xviii.  t 
U,  15;    Baaavi^r^,,  once,  Matt,  xvlii.   34,  « tormentors ; '^ 
!!!V;'"\  ''"''^  rendered  "  tossed,"  Matt.  xiv.  24 ;  once  « toil. 
ing,"  Mark  vi.  48 ;  once"  vexed,"  2  Pet.  ii.  8 ;  once  "  pained.- 

lof;.10       '     '  ""''^'  Rev.  ix.^5;  xi.  10;  xiv. 

Th^  ^"""f  "'^'"''''•f  i"*^^P^«t^ti««  i«  a  very  si^ie-^ite.  ^ 
2^sewo.^,  . a  uniformly  ren4ere4:3Jby  some  w<,rd^ 
me  of  suffering  and  pain,  may  be  allowed  to  retain  that 
«meanmg  ^u  eoenj  case  where  the  penal  administration  of 
^^a^i^t"      r  r«^^«°'  «^^*  i«'  wherever  the, theories -<tf 
anmhilationists  do  not  require  it  otherwise,  ^t  .there  we 
mns^  absolutely  exclude  the  idea  of  torme^l^t^l^  ^ 
.^    put  to  the  proof"  in  all  such  cases,  -     -^   /    *  ^      .       . 

In  vain  we  ask,  is  there  another  instancbi^hidilequires 
or  wouhlalWtJus  rendering  in  the  New  Tg^tam^^ 
^Z  ^«^%ient  authority  evidently  m  tlfc  matter,  forhe 
cemdescends  to  give  no  other,  nor  even  to  reason  abJut  it. 

iiut  he  IS  somewhat  unfortunate  nevertheless.    Fpr  in  the 


w 


n 


!!lli|f 


■\l 


330        PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.  P^ 

very  text  in  question  the  oanon  strangely  fails.  "  Divested 
of  the"  dramatic  dress,"  he  says,  the  passage  reads :  "  and 
they  shall  be  put  to  the  proof  unto  the  ages  of  the  ages." 
" That  trinity  of  evil,"  is  his  own  comment  upon  it,  "called 
the  dragon,  the  beast,  and  the  false  prophet,  shall  be  together 
Jnvolved  in  the  same  final  doom.''''  , 

That  is,  these  three,  two  of  them  symbols^  are  "  doomed  " 
to  be  put  to  the  proof  (without  torture)  in  a  lake  of  fire  and 
brimstone  forever.  The  enff  of  the  "putting**  to  proof  "is 
never  to  come !  FoMthis  putting  to  the  proof,  is  to  "  elicit 
evi'dence  " !  The  stride  trial  is  to  go  on  forever,  and  come 
to  no  result!  "'-.    i». 

But  this  is  not  what  Mr.  Morris  means.  Possibly  vhi. 
It  is  only  what  he  says.  They  are  tested  forever.  The  flfe- 
and  brimstone,  too,  arc  of  course  '*  dramatic,"  and  it  Is  only 
the  deviFs  political  doom,  as  j^ersdnallj/  he  is  to  be  destroyed  I 
J^erhaps  that '  makes  it  plainer.  If  not,  it  is  pretty  certain 
to  bewilder,  which  is  apparently  the  next  best  thing. 

But  Mr.  Morris  comes  at  last  to  the  question  for  whicli 
we  have  been  waiting,  "  who  or  what  are  the  beast  and  the 
false  prophet  ?  "  And  he  answers :  "  They  are  symboll  of 
governmental  and  of  moral  polity  and  power."  "The  beast 
is  a  composite  symbol  of  thfeirecular  polity  and  power  of  the 
Roman  world  in  the  last  stage  of  its  history."  "  He  ascend- 
eth  out  of  the  abyss,  andAe  *goc!th  into  perdition,' — -els  apo- 
leiauj  that  is,  unto  destruction — final  and  eternal  jilestruc- 
tion ;  but  he  is  first  to  be  put  to  the  proof."  » 

*•  'The  false  prophet,'  "  he  goes  on,  "  is  in  the  first  instance, 
called  *  another  beast,'  which  is  represented  as  coming  up  out  of 
the  earth.,"  He  "  is  the  symbol  of  the  moral  polity  and  power 
of-^e^Bom9.n  world  in  the  last  stage  of  its  history.  It  will  be 
accredited  of  Sataii,  who  will  display  in  it  most  marvellous  jiowers 
— ^miraculous  powers,  in  imitaticm  of  the  powers  of  the  Holy 
*  Ghost.. .  .  This  second  beast  is  first  called  the  *  false  prophet '  in 
Rev.  xvi.  13,  and  he  is  so  called  because  the  moral  polity  which 
is  thus  described  will  claim  to  be  the  mature  result  of  manly 
wisdom. ' 

"  In  Dan..vii  11,  the  destiny  of  the  Roman  beast  is  spoken  of 


«t 


U    m 


TIIE    APOCALYPTIC  VISIONS. 


J 


331 


> 


thus :  'I  beheld  tiU  the  beast  was  slain,  and  his  body  destroyed, 
and  given  to  the  burning  flame.'.  .  .  But  here  in  Rev.  xk.  20,  an 
additional  truth  is  supplied.  .  .  John  saw  the  beast  and  the  false 
.  prophet  cast  alive  into  the  lake  of  fire,  and  they  are  represented 
as  being  still  there  and  al'me  at  the  end  of  the  thousand  years, 
when  Satan  is  let  loose  out  of  his  prison.  And  this  is  intended 
to  teach  .  .  .  that  during  and  throughout  the  thousand  years,  it 
shaU  be  left  as  an  open  question,  as  to  whether  those- same  sys- 
tems of  secular  and  moral  power  will  ever  be  able  to  rise  up  again 
and  be  re-established  upon  the  earth  .  .  .and  so  the  beast  and 
false  prophet  are  represented  as  alive  in  an  open  pool,,  or  lake  of 
fire  burning  with  brimstone  upon  the  surface  of  the  earth  and  in 
view  of  all.  And  when  Satan  is  let  loose  the  great  experiment  is 
tried.  ...  Instead  of  an  escape  and  a  re-establishment  on  the 
part  of  the  beast  and  false  prophet,  by  the  assistance  of  the  devil, 
he  himself  is  cast  into  the  same  lake  of  fire  with  them,  and  to 
share  their  doom  :  and  it  shall  not  any  longer  be  an  open,  ques- 
H(m  as  to  whether  mor^l  evil  will  reappear  and  become  ram- 
pant  on  the  earth,  or  in  any  department  of  the  universe  of 
God."  "^ 

The  great  question  which  concerns  us  here,  and  on  ac- 
count  of  which  I  have  quoted  so  much  from^r.  Morris,  is, 
are  the  beast  and  false  prophet  men,  or  are  they  simply 
systems  or  polities  as  he  represents  it  ?  I  shall  attempt  no 
mterpretation  of  the  propljecy,  save  so  far  as  it  is  needed  for 
the  purpose  of  definitely  settling  this;  and  it  nmy  be  defi- 
^  nitely  settled,  for  God's  metaphors  are  not  ambiguous,  and 
scarcely  so  hard'to  read  as  Mr.  Morris'  interpretations. 

The  book  of  Daniel  conclusively  settles  that  the  seven 
headed,  ten-horned  " beast », of  Revelation  is  the  Roman 
empire,  as  ,Mr.  Morris  states  it,  although  in  k  somewhat 
different  form.  In  Rev.  xvii.  11,  however,  there  is  a  feature 
of  the  case  which  seems  to  have  escaped  him,  for  there  the 
beast  is  ide?itfjkd  vyUh  his  own  eif//uh  head.  Now  "  the 
seven  heads  are  seven  Ai/j^w."  The  imperial  beast  of  Reve- 
lation is  thus  stated  to  be  the  last  king,  for  in  his  day  it 
"  goes  into  perdition." 
In  Daniel,  at  the  commencement  of  tha  (}mt\\9  empireg. 


jtisspokenof      ■       <^  which  Rome  Js  the  last,  wo  fed  a  statement  very  similw^ 


/ 


332         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUrXsTATE. 

that  in  Revelation,  in  Nebuchadnezzar's  dream  the  head  of 
the  unage  is  of  fine  ^old,  and  typifies  the  Babylonian  jower; 
but  Daniel  applies/lt  personally  to  Nebuchadnezzar  himself: 
«  Thau  art  this  head  of  gold.'  This  double  identification  of 
the  golden  head  i^ay  help  us  to  understand  that  as  m  the  days 
of  Babylon  one^  man  represented  in  fact  the  empire,  so  it 
will  be  In  the  time  of  t;he  fulfilment,  of  Rev.  xvii.  11.  One 
man  wilt  repr/sent  the  empire  for  God ;  and  of  this  as  to  the 
III]:  last  beast  a^  intimation  at ,  least  >  given  in  tiie  book  of 

Baniel  also/  '  -  -—  ^  _.,  .  .  .  _^  „  -TT  ^^ 
«  I  beheld  then,"  says  the  prophet,  "because  of  the  voice 
of  the  gr^t  words  which  the  horn  spake,  f  beheld  even  till 
the  ftfiWwas  slain."  The  beast  is  judged  for  the  words  of 
the  horh  :  beast  and  horn  are  one  as  to  responsibility  before 
God.  /Now  a  "  horn  "  too  is  a  "  king "  (Rev.  xvii.  12) ;  and 
"herefeven  in  Daniel  is  one  morally  so  identified  ^with  the 
bea^  as  to  draw  down  the  judgment  of  God  upon  it. 

More  than  this,  when  we  look  at  th6  picture  in  the  Old 
Testament  we  find  this  horn  to  be  an  e/ewen«A  horn,  feeble 
in  its  beginnings,  but  rising  >to  superiority  over  the  rest  at 
/last.  In  Revelation  this  eleventh  horn,  so  all  important  m 
^Daniel,  does  not  appear  at  all;  but  there  is  an  eighth  head 
of  the  beast  in  Revelation,  which  on  the  other  hand  did  not 
appea/in  Daniel,  and  which  is  in  its  place  identified  with  the 
Jyeast  Who  can  resist  the  conviction  that  these  two  (both 
"  kings  ")  are  really  one  ? 

^  But  the  great  words  of  the  horn  bring  down  judgment 
i,  upon  the  beast :  and  this  assures  us  still  more  of  the  horn's 
personality.  For^^ir-^  polity  "  is  not  a  responsible  agent,  for 
that  we  must  have  a  living. being.  Nor  could  ve  think  of 
ten  polities,  of  which  an  eleventh  subdued  three,  as  is  said 
•  of  the  "  horn ; "  whereas,  if  a  real  king  be  intended,  nothing 
is  more  natuial.  Now,  a  king  is  the  interpretation  both  of 
"  horn  "  and  "  head,"  and  this  ought  to  be  simple  enough  not 
to  need  ahother  iQtferpretation  to  explain  it  to  us.  The 
simplest  is  the  best.  " 

The  bea^  is  "  ^^orshipped  "  too  by  all  that  dwell  on  earth, 


'  1 


THE  APOCALYPTIC   VISIONS. 


333 


and  the  number  of  the  beast  is  the  Humber  of  a  man.  He 
is  found,  when  Christ  comes,  with  the  kings  of  the  earth, 
(liberal  k4ngs,  as  Isa.  xxiv.  21,  assures  us),  heading  their  oppo- 
sition, and  recei^s  signal,  awful  judgment  as^thebead  of  it. 
.  That  judgment  we  shall  look  at  directly ;  mit  first  as  to  the 
"false  prophet."  Apart  fropi  all  interpretation  he  is  mani- 
festly the  same  as  the  second  beast  of  the  13th  chapter,  as 
again  Mr.  Morris  truly  says.  His  character  and  time  and 
end  couple  him  ui^d^akably  also  with  the  "  man  of  sin"  in 
Thessalonians,  anJ^HLo,  however  much  he  too  may  repre- 
sent a  "  polity,"  BpPraly  yet  (or  should  be  so)  a  man/ 

A  "  false ^ro/?/t(S<"  hardly  even  can  represent-  a  polity; 
save  as  it  represents  one  who  may  be  identified  with  it. 
His  miracles  are  Elias-like  :  he  makes  fire  come  down  from 
heaven  in  the  sight  of  men  ^jjie  exercises  all  the  power  of 
the  first  beast  in  his  presence ;  he  gives  breath  to  an^v  image 
of  the  beast;  he  causes^^  all  to  receive  the  latter's  mark. 
Why  and  upon  what  warrant  we  should  believe  that  this  is 
not  a  personal  agent,  who  can  tell  us  ?  And  when  we  find 
such  an  one  ^f^ted  with  the  beast,  and  kings  of  the  earth  in 
opposition  to^fhe  Lord  and  cast  alive  with  the  beast  into 
the  lake  of  fire  into  which  first  Satan  and  afterward  all  the 
wicked  are  cast,  and  suffering  torment  there  for  ages  and 
ages,  why  should  we  allow  the  dreams  of  men,  who  seem 
only  to  know  how  to  darken  daylight  itself,  turn  us  from  or 
make  us  hesitate  in  the  assured  belief,  that  these  two  are 
mc7?,  and  nothing  but  men  ? 

But  Mr.  Morris'  interpretation  of  the  judgment  must  de- 
tain us  a  little,  wild  and  incongruous  as  it  surely  is.  Exam- 
ination can  only  deepen  the  conviction  of  the  reality  of  what 
we  have  to  do  with  here,  and  of  its  simplicity  also,  a  sim- 
plicity worthy  of  the  Divine  Author.  It  is  not  without 
profit  ever  td^be  occupied  (if  one's  heart  be  in  it)  with  the 

':  I  Does  "taken  and  cast  alive  into  a  lake  of  fire  "  mean 
judgment?  Surely  one  would  think  so.  But  no;  they  are 
systems  it  seems,  still  alive  in  men'!^  min^ds,  it  remaining  an 


334  '     PACTS  A291)  THEOKIES  AS  HOr  A  TUTURB  STATE. 

>»  '  ,  ■.-'.■■ 

*  -,■  .■■■* 

open  qfuestion  whether 'they  will  come  up  again*  in  power 
upon  earth  or  not.    AAer  the   loosing  of  Satan  and  his 

'/^  '  failure,  and  being  cist  into  the  lake  of  fire  also,  it  isnnot  ah 
t>pen  question  any  mor6,  he  pSys,  l>ut  strangely  enough  they' 

•  are'still  tested  on  and  on  for  ages  and  ages  in  the  same  lake' 

'■.:^,  .•;;■;  of  firel^   ■■  ^\  ,  ■■  ^  \    ''^''''' - .:-       ' 

"And  that  lake  of  fire   re^^ieiyes mothers  alsd.     Men  are 
/         '   judged,  and  a)r|;er  Judgmdnt  cast  in,  to  be  tested  of  course  , 
'•     ^rther  still.       3!  -  •  ' 

:    **  '    The  lake  of  fire  is  on  earth,  too.     But  the  eairtli,  and  the 
*V     heavens  flee  away  from  the^ice  of  Ilim  that  si^^eth  on  the 
throne,  and  still  the  lake  of  ^re  abides  as  before. 
, ;     V  '^-  I  might,  ^lerhaps,.  conclude'^  with  Mr.  Morris  here  j  but  'he, 
'     ■  tbo  sees  ip  th§  crushing  of  the  serpent's  head  the  pei^onal 
V  annihilatip&  of  thei  devil,  and  (again t  with  Mr.  Hudson)  his 

•    '  "piersonal  destiny,  involved  »in  thfe  destruction  of  "the  Roman 

'  beAst  in  Dan.  vii.  11.     As  for  the  first,  the  ctnnihiMhon  of 
the  serpent  as  such  is  allo^yed  tQ  be  conlplete>,vhen  SaCtan  is 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire,  but  his  persoficd-  annihilation  is  by 
■    V         no  means  implied.    As  for  the  last,  they  must  show  us  how 
they  argue  it  before  we  can  ^reat  it  as  other  than  imagina- 

W^  will  now  listen  to  Mr.  Constable,  and  it.  nfeed  not  be 
for  any  length  of  time,  for  he  fairly  ^ives  the'matter  up. 
He  says:*       -        "    ' 
.  '*  The  sense  we  would  put  upon  the  passages  in  Eevelation  is, 
"      that  they  convey  in  highly, wrought  figures  suitable  to  the  char- 
I ;                       acter  of  the  entire  book,  only  the  old  idea  which  we  have  already 
gatheredfromlihe  rest  of  Scripture,  viz.,  that  the  punishment  of 
aU  consigned  to'  hell  will  'be  of  an  eternal  nature,  and  that  its 
fearful  elect— the  plunging  of  its  subjects  into  death  and  de- 
struction— will  ever  remain  visible  to  the  redeepaed  and  angelic 
-    ~t '  worlds.  .  We  will  not  try  to  establish  -this  sense  by  examining  the 
y         force  of  each  w&rd.    We  deny  that  language  so  highly  figurative  is 
•capable  of  any  such  dialectical  analysis,  or  thcd  svch  is  the  manner 
_^ tX  which  we  ordinarily  interpret  language  of  the -kind." 

. . .  _ -— — —  ■■■!       ..I,       m*   ■■IWUFP'^ 

is  ♦  Nat.  and  Dur.  of  Etern.  Punishm.,  p- 199,     .       I , 


THE'  ApOCAI^PTIC    VISIONS. 


335 


N 


[e  prefers  to  go  to  otter  passages  to  "show  the  uSe  of 
aiiliiW  latigUage.     Of  these,  he  proctuces  Uvo :  Isa.  xxxlv. 
9,  lO^tad  Jucle'a  Te%ence  tt)  Sodom.    Isaiah  says  of  Edqm^  ,. 
"The  fiind  thereof  shall  become  b,urning  pitch :  it  shall  not  ^ 
he  quendh^  night  nor  day,  the  smoke  thereof  shall  go  up 
forever."  \  Mr.  Constable  ^sks :       - 

"  Will  thc^advocates  of  Augustine's  hell  tell  us  that  if  wo  went 
to  IdUinea,  Wi»  should  see"  people  i^uffering  pai\i  from  some  period 
subsequent  to  Baiah'sprcfphecy  to  the  present  time  ?  *  ,  .  3^I^e 
present  condition  of  Edom  is  the  explanation  of  the  poetic  fi^re  : 
it^  cities  have  fallen  into  riun  :  the  whole  land  is  a  d^Sfa't.  '  Th^'. 
burning  pitcln  tli\  unquenchable  fire,  the  smoki^  asceadijilg  for- 
ever, is  reduced  to  imn ,mher  hue  in  l7i<;inii;/H(if/&  of  pros^"        --^ 

This  iflL  only "  s,ay mg'  t<hat  the  languagejis  that  of  .^etic  ex- 
aggeration.   Wa  utterly  and  aHsqlutely  dfepy  it.  j  Th^pr^sent  • 
condition  of  EdQih  isi  not  whaj,  Isaia|.h  pfophesies  «!*.     Se'  ^.. 

•  speakfP  qf  a  yet  futuftsVinje,  as  ver:.2f-8  distinctly  sho^^afid  ; 
then  this  terrible  judgfiaeW  will  be  fuj^lled*.  If  Scripture/ 
language  were  so  deceptVe,  ^viio  could,  ttust  it?  But  « 
Isaiah  says  HQthing,  aboVt  ".endless  life  In  pain"— not Mei: 
word,  it  is  Mr.'CohstableNwho  has  foisted  the.thbught^  upon  ' 
him.  ^  Nor  is  the-  Old 'Test^m^nt,"  foreyor  "  the  "nges  of 
.the  ages'"  of  the  New.     . 

Next  as  to  j^ulfe.  7,  wh^m  it,  is  said,  that ''  Sodom  'and 
Gbtn6trah,  and  the  cities  "abpuMhem  in  like  ra'anner,  giving    , 
themselves  over  to  fornication,  and  gding  after  strange  flesh!^ 
are  set  forth  tck  an  example,  suffVijig  the  vengeance  of  eter- 
nal* fire," — ^Mr.   Constable  says  this  cannot  refer  td  any 

°  sufferiYig  in  hades,  for  their  conditioii  ther6  is  never  Minted 
to  in  Scripture,  and  is  therefore  n)^  "  example  " ;  thaii^eW  ' 
is  a  fiituf e  thing  for  all,  and  Jud A  speaks   of  somethings 
"  which  had  long  been  a  plain  and  pdJpable  ivaming  to  th0 
ungodly  of  th|8  earth."    He  condludek  therefore  it  can  only  . 
refer  to  ^^  their  overthrow  in  the  dam  of  Zot,  and  their/ 
abiding  condition  ever  since.^''    "  They  and  t]i6ir  woWl' were  . 
and  this  rninfid,  lifeless,  hrtp^iess"  condition  has 


■ir--- 


\ 


:^^/.. 


bufflt  up 


-^Ifemdined  to  the  present  time.     1^\\q  whole  transacticJn  con^   . 


•      4 


--i1 


!»■•/ 


!i|     . 


■     .*'■■-■ 


HI  9 


^36        JAOTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PDTUnfi  Sf  Af  fi.  ^ 

veys  the  id^*K)f  consci<#ti8  pain  for  a  time,  followed  by  ruin 
and  death  forever.  This  is,  according  to  Scripture,  to 
^  suffer  the  veiigeance  of  eternal firef^'  . 

This  is,  rather,  the  way  in  which  men  venture  to  interpret 
the  word  of  God,  until  it  becomes  the  b^e-word  Snd 
scorn  of  infidelity.  The  cities  are  burnt  up  and  not  to  be 
found,  and  the  land  lies  desofate,  and  this  is  the  vengeance 
of  eternal  fire !  Words  may  mean  anything  in  this  way ; 
they  are  made  not  to  express  sense,  but  to  hide  it.  But 
it  is  not  very  hard  to  see  that  Jude  in  speaking  of  these 
"citi6s"  speaks  of  the  people  in  them.    The  peop/^  had 

•  sinned,  and  upon  the  people  the  judgment  fell,  the  "fire  and 
brimstone"  from  heaven  being  t^type  or  pattern  of  that 
"eternal  fire  "in  which  they  suffer  still.  The  temporary 
fire  by  which  they  perished  from  the  earth  was  not  the  eter- 

„nal  one,  nor  is  it  stated  to  be  such.     But  the  wrath  of  God»^ 
manifested  upon  them  is  a  sample  or  specimen  {SetyMo)  of 
what  could  not  be  temporary,  that  wrath  against  sin  which 

.  is  the  "  eternal  fire."  Mr.  Constable  confounds  the  people 
with  the  mere  material  cities,  and  thinks  of  a  present  con- 
dition  of  palpable  judgment,  of  which  not  a  word  is  said. 
The  fii-e  which  destroyed  them  was  "  eternal  fire,"  if  frou 
look,  not  at  the  material  fire  which  was  at  once  its  instru- 
ment and  symbol,  but  at  the  divine  wrath  so  manifested. 
There  is  then  no  diflSculty  in  the  matter. 

Nor  need  we  discuss  therefore  the  principle  which  Mr. 
Constable  obtains  from  this  passage,  "that  the  judgments 
of  God  lipon  individuals  or  nations,  in  destroymg  them  here 
for  sin,  is  the  pattern,  and  example  of  that  destruction  which 
He  will  inflict  on  them  hereafter  for  sin;"  although  he. 
J»resses  t<^^the  same  end  also  our  Lord's  words  in  regard  to 
the  Galileans,  "  Unless  ye  repent  ye  shall  all  likeioise  perish," 
and  eveii  Paul's  statement  that  the  things  that  happenc^d  to 
Israel  in  the  wilderness  "  happened  to  them  for  ensamples," 

r^ads  «'  types."    We  have  been  ourselve^ 


where  ^be  margin 

largeljf  reading  such  types,  and  it  is  not  to  be  supposed  that 

we  ar^  afraid  of  the  latter  principle.,   But  when  we  are  told 


T 


^ 


WlE  APOCALYPTIC  VISI0K8. 


887 


that  "  thft  slaying  of  the  Galileans  by  Pilate  essentially  re- 
Bcmbles  the  death  of  the  wicked  in  liell,"  we  piay  be  allowed 
to  ask  for  some  further  proof  than  his  -saying  so  can  afford 

us.  \  ■     *     '  '■  '-  '^    ■ 

Thus  neither  Jude  nor,  Isaiah  are  in  the  least  sympathy 
with  Mr.  Constable  in  his  endeavor  to  give  a  sense  to  bcrip- 
ture  which  he  "  will  hot  try  to  establish  by  examining  the  force 
of  each  word."  It^  h  a  very  real,  however  little,  ingenuous 
aconfession,  that  >;  the  words,  if  siftedjlare  against  him.  He 
does,  however,  try  to  do  soiuewhat  even  here,  an^l  with  ref- 
erence to  /^a<sa»'/C<».^'  to  torment,"  he  points  out|  that  "  it  is 
as  applicable  to  things  Avithout  life  as  to  living  things,"  be- 
cause it  is  applied  orico' (metaphorically)  a^we  havse  seeH) 
to  the  tossing  of  Ji  boat  f  Ho  he  thinks  the  devil;  might  be 
'*  tossed  "  in  a  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone  forever  !  -  If  that 
will  not  do,  Schleu^ier,  it  seems,  has  said  that  it  is  iised,not 
only  for  actual  pain,  but  "  for  death  produced  by  ^uch  pain,# 
an(Jiiii'tbis  sense  (he  thinks)  it  is  peculiarly  applicable  to 
futiire  punishment."  No  doubt ;  so  the  devil  is  to  be  killed 
by  torment  day  and  night  forever  and  ever ! 

We  may  leave  lVJ[r.  Constable  then,  to  look  at  'sonie  fVesh 
arguments  with  Mr.  Minion.    It  is  strange  how  fresh  the*: 
arguments  are,,  and  how  little  one  write^  accepts  those  of '^" 
another;  each  seems  satisfied  only  with  his  own.     But  vt^^^ 
must  be  as  brief  as.  the  case  w\ll  allow.  ;,       /f^ 


■  I-     ♦ . 


>H'. 


V    ■ 


1 


^-.;-'^- 


■t  •;•■: 


'  r' 


838       FACIS  A^P  IHJCOlUJtiS  AS  10  ▲  BVTVm  SIAl£. 


\. 


# 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 


I 

mi 


/-. 


THE  APOCALYPTIC   VISIONS. — 2.  - 

'  "  If  we  are  to  learn  aiiything  with  regard  to  what  will 
happen  to  the  persons  here  represented,^^  says  Mr.  Mintqn,* 
i^  we  must  first  inquire  what  would  happen  to  that  lohich 
represents  t/iem,  as  the  consequence  of  being  cast  into  a  l.ake 
of  fire.  Now  it  so  happens  that  in  every  one  of  the  five 
or  six  cases  here  8{)ecified,  the  result  would  be  utter  de- 
str^icJbTon'.  They  are  all  living  things,  and  not  one  of  them 
could  possibly  exist  in  a  lake  of  fire.  A  wild  beast ;  a  false 
prophet;  'the  devil,'  evidently  under  the  form  of  the 
•dragon,'  seen  first 'in  ch.  xii.,  and  again  in  xxii;  2;  '  death 
and  hell '  (hadea)Y  as  evidently  under  the  form  already  seen 
in  ch.,  vi.  8,'  of  a  ridpr  or  riders  on  horseback ;:  and  '  whoso- 
ever' of  the  deacl,  small  and  great,  that  stood' before  God, 
'  was  not  found  written  in  the  book  of  lite.'  If  these  things 
be  intendpd  to  predict  th^  final  doom  pf  wicked  men  and 
|©d  spirits,  then  their  doom  is  set  fotth  under  images 
■[Xpoint:  to  nothing  less  than  extinction  -of  being." 
^•^ows"  ho^  iitterly  at  fault  as  to  these  figures  is 
culation  Mr.  Miiiton  irecommends.  How  long  would 
a  wild  beast  live  in  k  lake  of  fire  ?  Cfertainly,  if  -  we  ibtlow 
our  thoughts,  an  exceedingly  short  space  of  time.  How 
long  if  wej,  take  Scripture  ?  A  thonsand  years  as  first  seen, 
and  then  the  ag^s  ofages.y  Similarly  as 'to  to  the  false  pro- 
.phet.  So  as  to  the  devil  from  the  time  he  is  cast  in. 
How  worse  than  vain  to  speculate  1  how  entirely  Scripture 
contradicts  Mr.  Minton's  suggestions.  *        S* 

But  this  Mr.  Minton  is  candid  enough  to  own,  and  he 


says: 


*  Way  Everlasting,  p.  58,  etc. 


•;. 


THIS  APOCAXYPTIG,  VISIOlfS, 


339 


■'*»^ 


"  I  at  once  admit  my  inability  to  explain  tlm  in  any  way  jtl^t 
is  quite  satisfactory  to  m^  own  mind.    But  I  do  not  admit  tiuot 
the  view  which  it  seeins  td  oppose  must  therefore  be  radically 
.wrong  (!)  .  .  .A  wild  beast  could  no  more  live  in  such  a' condi- 
tion for  a  day  than  for  p.n  age-"    What  then  ?     "This  inclines 
me  to  think  that  the  ages'  of  ages  indicate,  not  th^  period  of 
suffeidng  to  the  ocndemned,  but  the  eternal  destruction  that 
comeb  upon  them.  .  .  .What  then,  you  will  ask  agaip,  do  I  un- 
derstand by  '  torment '  ?    I  understand  by  it — destruction  (!)    ' 
And  to  all  objections  that  torment  and  destruction  are  two^flfer-i 
efit' things,  I  reply  that  ^the  Spirit  of  God  Himself  has  mos^ 
pointedly  applied  the  word  torment  tq^desti^uction  in  one  of  those    « 
very  passages.     Bead  the  account  in  chap,  xviii,  of  Babylon's  de-  .^, 
struction. '  The  inhabitants  peHsh  'in  One  d^y '  by 'death  and 
mourning  and  faming  ';  and  thAi  the  city.jtself  is  'u^erly  burned 
with  fire.'    Now  in  the  long  description  of  the  burning  which  fol- ' 
lows,  there  is  not  a  \vord  of  any  living  persons  or  things  b(6ing 
left  in  the  city,  to  suflfer  torture  from  the  fire  that  consumes  it. 
The  city  is,  of  course',  destroyed  for*  the  sin  of  its  inhabitants  ; 
but  their  destruction  is  (^stinguished-in^  ver.  8  from  its  destruc^ 
tion.    Yet  they  who  gaze  upon  that  burning  mass  '  stand  far  oflF 
for  the  fear  of  her  tormentj    What  caai  the  word  mean  there  but 
destruction?"  '   "  ,  |        . 

Thus  must  words  be  perverted  by  m^'s  will,  USSSt  tor- 
ment  mean  what  torment  never  meant,  and  the  sanation  of. 
the  Spirit  of  God  be  claimed  for  an  unnatural  and  impossible 
use  of  language,  such  as  never  could  be  imputed  to  any- 
thing beside  Scripture.    And  wha1>  is  the  ground  for  this 
notable  &,bsurdity?    Babylon's  inhabitants  perish  **in  one" 
day,"  says  Mr.  Minton,  by  "  death  and  mounting  and  famine," 
but  the  city  i,s  distinguished  from  these  is  burned  with  fire, 
DO  living  inhabitant  being  in  it;  and  ver.  8  distingaishes  the 
destifuction  of  the  inhabitants  from  that  of  the  oity !    It  is 
ver.  8  he  is  citing  for  all  this  :  '6f  course  he  must,  have  read 
It  J  but  this  is  what  it  says: — ^_"  Therefore  shall  her  pktguea 
COME  in  one  day,  death  .and  mourning  and  ^unine ;  and  she  ' 
55hall  be  utterly  burned  with  fire;  for  strong  is  the  Lord 
l^od  that  judgeth  her  1  *'     W  here  is  it  said,  Mr.  Mint;,pn,  that 
the  mhabitants  all  peri^fy  in  one  day  ?     Nowhere :   h^r 


.,% 


■#  ■ 
*  I » 


\)';':. 


m^~ 


^TJS-^^J-^-' 


#■■ 


'  ^Wm 


340        FACTS  AlfD  TU£OBI£S  AS  TO  A  FUTUJOIf  STAlE.  \. 

plac^ues  cowte  in  one  dfty,  not  are  over  1.  Where  Is  the  city 

*  *-'  •',0  %M^r- 

distinguished  from  the  inhabitants,  so  ai  to  imply  that  these 
do  not  suffer  in  the  burning  "of  the  former  ?  Again,  no- 
where !  it  is  bold  perversion  of  the  language :  find  all  to  give 
to  the  word  torment  in  the  subsequent  verse  an  impossible 
meaning,  which  would  scarcely  have  been  attempted  to  be 
fastened  itpon  any  other  book  than  Scripture,  as  I  have 
already  said.  '  > 

We  can  well  believe  that  his  interpretation  is  not  satis- 
factory to  Mr.  Minton.  It  is  the  only  encouraging  thing 
about  it,  that  it  is  not. 

But  yet  he  has  not  done  with  Babylon.  If  she  perishes 
so  as  not  to  be  "  found  any  more  at  all  " — "  what  then,"  he 
asks,  "is  th^ ' meaning  of  her  smoke  rising  up  forever  and 
ever?  What,  but  that  her  guilt  and  her  destruction  will 
never  be  forgotten ;  that  she  will  be  preeminently  an  object 
of  everlasting  contempt  ?  Sucli  destruction  IheXieva  to  be 
the  '  torment '  of  all  impenitent  sinners,  and  such  an  eternal 
memory  of  sin  and  its  destruction  to  be  the  smoke  of  that 
torment  ascending  up  forever  and  ever."* 

So  that  we  must  read,  instead  of  "  torment,"  "  destruction 
day  and  nir/ht  for  the  ages  of  ages  "  !  • 

I  do  not  believe  that  Babylon's  smoke  ascending  up  for- 


*  Mr.  Roberts,  who  in  his  "  Man  Mortal  "  does  nothing  but  repeat 
Mr.  Minton's  arguments,  and  to  whon)  no  separate  reply  is  needed 
therefore,  quotes,  however,  "  her  smoke  rose  up  forever  and  ever,"  to 
remark:  "  If, the  sense  here  were  the  popular  notion  of  absolutely  end 
less  tuturity,  how  absurd  to  desftribe  it  in  the  pasi  tense — '  rose  up  ' — 
tLS  a,  thing  havinff  happened  f  How  can  a  thing  have  happened  '  for- 
ever'  in  the  English  sense  ?  "  Aye,  or  in  the  Greek  either"?  Mr.  R. 
has  forgotten  his  Greek  here,  although  he  quotes  it  in  tTie  very  next 
words.    The  Greek  h  ava^aivEty"  ffoeth  up." 

The  only  additional  thing  to  be  noticed  as  to  him  is,  that  he  makes 

■  the  casting  "  alive  "  of  the  systems  into  the  lake  of  fire  t6  intimate  that 

they  will  not  die  of  themselves,  but  be  destroyed  by  the  Lord  at  His 


Do  the  "  kings  of  tlie  earth  ""  die, of  ihemselves,  because 
And  how  is  it  the  systems  are  still  "  alivo  "  after  a  thousand 
years,  if  they  are  destroyed  (in  his  sense)  by  the  I^rd  at  His  coming  1 


commg    : 
they  die ! 


.  0  (7| 


destruction 


elves,  because 
er  a  thousand 


.THJ| 


.VPOCAEYPTIC  VlStONsJ. 


341 


ever  anl  ever  means  that  Ijhe  memory  of  it  will  be  forever.* 
The  memory  of  all  that  has  ever  been  will  endure  forever 
and  this  iis  more  than  the  assertion  of  such  a  common-place 
thought.  The  key  to  the  expression  is  that  identification  of 
the  city  and  people  which  Mr.  Minton  so  vainly  contends 
against.  The  expression  is,  of  course,  figurative,  but  iden- 
tical with  that  in  ch.  xiv.  11,  yet  to  be  looked  at.  Babylon 
suffers  forever,  of  course  in  those  to  whom  her  guilt  really 

bgifiPga 


But  Mr.  Minton  goes  on : — 

"  But  it  is  urged  that  the  ivild  beast  and  false  prophet,  who 
were  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  before  the  millennium,  are  spoken 
of  at  its  close  as  if  still  there.  This  is,  however,  a  mistake,  the  word 
'  are '  not  being  in  the  original.  When  a  word  has  to  be  supplied, 
it  should  be  supplied  from  what  has  preceded,  and  not  made  to 
assert  an  independent  fact.  '  The  devil  that  diKieived  them  was 
cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  and  brimstone,  where  the  beast  and  the 
false  prophet  '—what  ?  Surely  '  were  cast.*  To  supply  'are '  is 
just  to  beg  the  question,"  and  assert  a  fact  which  is  not  stated  in 
the  record.  The  words  which  follow, '  and  (they  ^the  verb  being 
plural)  shall  be  tormented  day  and  night  forever  and  ever,' 
merely  contain  a  declaration  that  the  destruction  of  the  beast  and 
the  fdse  prophet  and  the  dragon  woiUd  be  final  and  inemediable  ; 
none  of  them  would  ever  appear  again.  The  two  former  are  in- 
cluded in  this  subsequent  declaration,  because  nothing  of  the 
kind  had  been  sai  I  when  they  were  first  cast  Jnto  the  lake  of 

fire."     '     "  :  ,:;.  ■        \'.    -^^.J.         ■..,■, 

That  is,  agifln,  we  must  transform  torment  into  destruc- 
tion, and  say  "  they  shall  be  destroyed  day  and  night  for 
ever  and  ever"!  And  even  8(«ve  must  believe  that  "they 
shall  be  destroyed"  means  tnli  two  of  theih  haoe  been 
already,  and  only  the  third  "  shall  be"!  These  are  some- 
what large  demands  upon  our  faith — the  sceptical  would  say 
"credulity  ";  but  where  man's  will  is  at  work  there  is  still 
credulity  enough  for  this  and  more.  Yet  Mr.  Minton  finds 
it  himself  not  quite  satisfactory,  it  would  seem.  ^  He  (»annot 


I 


blame  us  if  we  sympathize  with  him 

*  In  a  former  work  I  did  accept  this,  but  oti  more  mature  cousidei 
ation  must  wilhdraw  that  accpptance 


^•v 


Jt, 


ili-rfs**^- 


342         FACIS  And  TUEOaiES  A8T0  A  FUTURE  STATE.   4 

But  -^e  'hU  still  a  resource,  if  his  explanation  of  these 
texts  fails  id  he  "  wholly  satisfactory,"  as  he  admits  it  may, 
he  can  Mtill/quoation  ours !  If  ho  can  makfcTiothing  els?  out 
of  them,  l/c  will  not  accept  what  they  plainly  say  : — 

"^'  Now./waiviug  tho  (luestion  which  a  UniverHJilist  would  raise, 
'as  to  the  ages  of  agea  " — If  tho  doubt  is  not  Mr.  Mintou'a  own, 
why  do(/s  he  uffi'ct  to  raise  it  ?— "yout  argument  mimifestly  de- 
pends /iipon  tho  assumption  that  t^e  'torment' spoken  of  in 
those  Visions  reprt-sonts  torment  in  the  future  realities  which  are 
thereiii  predicted.  But.  how  can  you  prove  that  ?  You  can  pro- 
duce/a string  of  texts  to  show  tho  precise  moanipg  of  hrtsanos 
(torment)  ;  and  so  can  I  produce  a  string  of  texts  *  to  show 
the  precise  meaning  of  therinn  (a  "wild  boast).  Does  the  beast  in 
the/ vision  represent  a  beast  in  the  reality?  Then  why  should 
toiTinent  in  the  vision  represent  torment  in  tho  reality  ?  " 

before  we  answer  thit,,  let  us  hear  Mr.  Minton's  summing 
up  of  conclusions  (if/aiuHt  this  :— 

"  1.  The  word  '  torment '  is  applied  to  the  burning  of  the 
lity  Babylon,  when  its  inhabitants  had  already  perished." 
^his  has  been  disproved.  ,         - 

"2.  Its  smoke  is  said  to  rise  up  forever  and  ever,  after 
lit  has  been  so  completely  destroyed  that  it  j^nuot  be 
found."  This  is  also  a  mere  confusion  arifrlng  OHj^of  the 
first  mistake.  . 

"  3.  While  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are  cast  into 
the  lake  of  fire,  all  their  ^adherents  arc  '  slain  with  the 
sword ' ;  which,  on  your  principle  of  interj)retation,  would 
show,  that  some  of  the  wicked  will  be  punished  with  eternal 
torment,  others  with  death." 

Quite  true,  as  to  the  time  of  the  Lord's  coming;  but  the 
latter  are  raised  among  "the  rest  of  the  dead,"  and  then  cast 
into  the  lake  of  fire  also.  Kow,  if  the  beast  and  the  false 
prophet  are  "phases  of  evil,"  as  Mr.  M.  suggests,  and  not 
persons,  thei/  should  be  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  into  which 
Hi  Satan  and  all  the  wicked  afterwards  are  cast,  is  a  difficulty 

upon  his  side  he  can  never  explain.  7/' their  adherents  had 
been  at  the  same  time  cast  in,  it  mifjht  have  been  contended 
that  they  shared  the  fate  of  their  adbereats,  or  if  all  bad 


}i 


!  « 


■  9/' 


THE   APOCALYPTIC  VISIONS, 


m 


■-..*' 


ninjr  of  the 


B 


been  slain  this  might  have  been  said.  But  that  "  phases 
of  ^vii "  should  be  cast  into  a  place  of.  jtorraent  is  inexpli- 
cable in  the  way  the  verHcs  stand.        i,^^!''^^^*^ 

His  fourth  objection  applies  only  ^</{*]^^^|l'  1<^>  so  must 
bo  reserved.- '^r       "  ■■"•.,         wli'-bl^^J    ,'- 

His  iiflh  is  the  old  mistake  as  to  dqfi|||p[m^hades  being 
i^astin.-    •  .\..;:'  ^.'i  ,^,  -;.,. 

His  sixth  is,  that  torment  is  not  mentioned  with  regard  to 
"Thenaead  in  ver.  15.  But  the  lake  of  fire  is  not  (as  he  as- 
Berts)  "  the  very  embodiment  of  destruction,"  in  his  sense  of 
it,  as  we  have  seen,  and  death  being  destroyed  at  the  begin- 
ning of  the  aufcs  makes  it  impossible  thereafter  tha^  meii 
should  die.     He  asks  : — 

"7.  But  does  the  lake  of  fire  itself  go  on  bm-niug  forever  ?  Is 
it  •  everlasting'  or  'unquenchable  '  in  that  sense  ?  What  are  the 
very  next  words  ?  '  And  1  saw  a  new  heaven  and  a  new  earth  ; 
for  the  first  heaven  and  the  fipt  earth  were  passed  away.'  What 
then  has  become  of  the  lake  of  fire  which  St.  John  saw  ot^ 
first  earth  ?  Why,  of  course,  it  has  passed  away  with  the  l|||p[' 
of  which  it  formed  part.     Is  there  any  lake  of  fire  on  the  new 

earth?"      ,.  ■  ■•   ..      ,;  ;      "  '  ■    ■    ;  ■■-.■..■-■.•/■  v^^    ■■  . 

I  think  it  useful  to  quote  exact  words,  or  people  Inight 
really  believe  there  was  some  strange  perversion  on  my  part, 
or  misconception  at  least  of  an  adversary's  arguments.  'Mr. 
Minton  proceeds  with  a  full  page  more  of  reasonings  upon 
this  foundation,  in  which  it  is,  of  course,  quite  useless  to 
follow  him,  for  the  foundation  itself  is  lacking.  T^here  doe»' 
the  passage  speak  of  the  Igike  of  fire  being  on  earth  at  all  ? 
He  would  seem  to  be  reading  from  another  Bible  than  thAt 
which  is  in  all  our  hands.  Why,  the  devil  is  only  cast 
into  this  lake  of  fire  at  the  close  of  the  millennium,  there  to* 
be  tormented  day  and  night  for  the  ages  of  ages.  What- 
ever  that  means,  a;  long  lapse  of  time  is  surely  indicated. 
But  in  the  very  next  words  we  read  of  the  great  white  throne 
set  up,  and  the  earth  and  the  heavens  fleeing  aw^y.  Are  the 
ages  of  a^es  all  expired  in.  the  meantime,  and  betbre  the 
final  judgment  ? 

But  again,  the  throne  is  set,  the  earth  and  the  heavens  flee 


# 


l-#*. 


344      Pacts  and  theories  as  to  a  puTmiE  state. 

^  •  ■  ' 

away ;  but  the  dead  suftimoned  from  their  graves  are  east  into 
the  lake  of  fire,  which,  of  course,  has  ceased  to  exist  with 
that  eartli  which  has  fled  away  ! 

We  will  now  answer  Mr.  Minton's  question  as  to  why 
"torment"  in  the  vision   should  represent  torment  in  the  . 
reality.     And  we  answer : — 

1.  Because  it  is  impossible  to  say  what  it  does  represent 
figuratively.  No  one  has  given  us,— no  one  (it  seems)  can 
give  us,  any  meaning  in  the  least  degree  satisfactory. 
-  2.  Because  tlw  language  throughout  the  twentieth  chapter 
beciomes  more  and  more  literal  continually.  The  "  dc^vil," 
when  cast  in,  is  distinguished  by  the  title  given  him  in  the 
interpretation  of  the  previous  vision,  not  by  "  the  dragon," 
as  in  the  vision  itself.*  The  interpretation  in  verse  6  of  the 
"first  resurrection  "  shows  us  the  exceeding  simplicity  of 
the  vision  it  interprets.  Souls  (persons)  slain  are  seen  to  live 
again,  and  that  signifies  literal  resurrection.  The  "thou- 
sand years,"  the  reign  as  kings  and  priests,  are  the  same  in 
the  vision  and  the  interpretation  alike.  .  And  as  the  solemn 
subject  of  judgment  is  approached,  the-plainest  words  seem 
stu<iied  by  which  to  set  it  forth.  IIoio  simple  and  decisive' 
they  are  we  can  realize  the  better,"  after  their  survival  of  thie 
treatment  which  we  have  seen  thShi  endure.  , 

3.  Because  literal  death  in  the  lake  of  fire  we  have,  seen 
to  be  impossible,  and  fire  which  does  not  annihilate  ra-ust , 
apparently  torment. 

'     4.  Because  the  devils  in  the  gospel  speak  of  torment  as  (^ 
their  future  doom,  and  here,  therefore,  the  word  is  guar- 
anteed as  literal. 

We  ask  Mr.  Minton's  attention  seriously  to  these  reasons 
as  well  as  to  the  examination  qf  his  own  views  which  has 
been  given.  He  cannot  complain  of  misrepresentation  or 
oi  'partial  representj^tion,  nop  do  we  think  we  have  dealt 

♦  The  "  beast "  is  iudeed  still  that,  but  I  see  not  how  else  he  could     . 
be  spoken  of  without  revealing  the  mystery  which  is  left  to  the  "  mind 
which  hath  understanding."    The  second  "  beast  "  has  become  "  the  ■ 


false  prophet. 


TUB   APOCALYPTig  VISIONS. 


345 


with  them  more  severely  than  ho  would  himself  desire  if 
God  give  him  another  mind  upon  this  subject  every  way  so 
important  to  souls.  \^ 

There  is  but  one  more  argument^  adduced  by  Blaiii,  an^ 
repeated  by  Goodwyu,*  that  "day  and  night  arc  character- 
istic elements  of  this  dispensation,"  but  in  that  case,  for  the 
purpose  of  his  argument,  "this  dispensation  "'  must  last  "  for 
the  ages  of  the  ages."  That  "night"  is  not  found  in  the 
New  Jerusalem  (xxii.  5)  or  the  new  earth  is  nothing  to  the 
purpose  self-evidenfly.  I  grant  the  language  may  be 
figurative,  but  its  obvious  use  is  to  convey  the  thought  of 
what  is  continuous  or  ceaseless,  which  in  addition  to  t^e 
phrase  "  forever  and  ever  "  shows  even  by  itself  that  annihila- 
tion cannot  be  meant.  What  would  be  the  force  of  "  anni- 
hilation day  aftid  night  forever  and  ever  "  V 

The  arguments  on  the  side  of  "  conditional  immortality  " 
close  then  here.  But  we  have  still  to  glance  at  those  of  the 
restorationist  school.  -    .^ 

Dr.  Farrar  is  "quite  content  that  texts  should  decide  " 
this  question.  That  would  give  us  hope  that  in  telling  us 
'*  what  hell  is  not,"  he  would  have  shown  us  at  least  what 
this  connected  prophecy  of  Revelation  on  the  very  subject, 
does  not  mean.  But  although  he  has  spent  pages  upon^e 
rabbis,  I  cannot  find  ten  lines  upon  this  main  text  througHRt 
his  book.  Indeed  the  only  thing  at  all  to  the  purpose  that 
I  can  find  is  one  note  of  two  liaes  quoted  from  Dr.  Chaun- 
cey,  that  "If  all  things  without  exception  be  subjected  to 
Christ,  then  death,  the  sec<)Mr?  death,  as  well  as  the  first 
death,  will  be  finally  swallowed  up  in  vi<Jtory."t  This  be- 
longs properly  to  another  branch  of  our  subject,  but  a  word 
or  two  is  amply  sufficient  in  answer.  For  the  "second 
death "  is  always  subject*  to  Christ,  and  never  opposed, 
never  needs  to  be  subjected.  Are  the  prisons  to  which  a 
king  commits  his  prisoners  not   subject   to  the  king  who 


*  Death  not  Life,  Truth  and  Tradition,  p.  32. 
t  Eternal  Hope,  Excursus  6,  p.  222. 


/ 


I 


'  mgjjjll^,0t^- 


.'< 


k^ 


M 

l]t<i] 

I'ir 


it 


-I-.- 


*•" 


346        FACTS  AND  THEOllIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUltJir  S*t  ATE. 

commits  them  there  ?    Dr.   Farrar'$  reasoning  is  scarcely 
equal  to  his  powers  in  other  respects,  if  he  believes  this. 
«  Mr.  Jn^-  Qxenham  ii;|  his  "letter "to  Mr.  Gladstone, 
again  speiw  pages  upon  two  lines  of  Keble,  afid  not  a  line 
upon  the  Scripture  so  ;^11  important  in  this  matter. 

We  must  depend  then  upon  Mr.  Jukes  mainly  to  repre- 
sent  the  restofationist  view  h^re,  apart  of  course  from  the 
general  reasoning  upon  the  expressions  for  eternity  which 
we  have  already  examined.  And  we  shall  allow  him  as 
usual  to  speak  for  himself*    II^Aiays: — *  _^  ^ 

:  "  I  cajmot  even  attempt  here  to  trace  the  stages  or  processes  " 
of  the  future  judgment  of  those  who  are  raised  up  to  condelq^d- 
tiou  ...  but  wlift  has  here  been  gathered  from  the  word  of  God 
as  to  tlie  course  and  method  of  His  salvation,  throws  &^^K^^^' 
upop  that '  resurrection  of  judgment  'which  our  Lord  speal^^S^ 

Hotsr  the  method  of  God's  salvation  should  throw  great 
light  upon  the  process  oi  ^naX  judffmentj  it  is  very  hafd  to 
say.  Mr.  Jukes  of  course  assumes  that  that  judgment  is 
itself  a  procC'ss  of  s5ilvation».  In  that  case  of.course  it  would 
throw  light.  But  on  the  contrary,  Scripture  contrasts  these 
as  two  incompatible  things.  lie  that  believes  in  Christ 
''has  everlasting  life,  ami  shall  not  come  into  judgment," 
while  "  he  that .  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life." 
"He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saned,  and  he 

'that  believeth  not  shall  be  co)ulerimedy  "  To  them  an  evi- 
dent token  oi  perdition,  but  to  you  of  salvation."  "  There 
is  one  Lawgiver  who  is  able  toisave  and  to  destroy.''^  "  An'l 

f  if  the  righteous  scarcely  be  saved,  where  shall  the  ungodly 
and  the  sinner  appear  ?  "t     This  is  the  uniform  tenor  of   . 
Scripture,  in,  a  great  variety  of  expressions  which  assure  us   , 
that  the  Judgment,  of  the  wicked  is  the  very  opposite  of 
being  a  method  of  salvation :  it  is  a  method  of  fdestruction. 
But  we  will  let  Mr.  Jukes  proceed. 

^"  Awful  as  it  is,  who  cau   doubt  the  end^ud  purpose  of  this 


*  Restitution  of  All  9Sihings,pp.  88-95. 
t  John  V.  24:  iii.  36;    Mark  xvi.   16 


Phil,  i.   28;  Jamea  iv.    12. 


I  Pet.  iv.  IP, 


«   J' 


■>r 


THE  Al»OCALTfPTIC  VISIOKS^* 


347 


rjjose 

of 

this 

I'ames 

iv. 

12. 

,•;' 

1 

judgment  ?  for  *  God,  the  judge  of  all/  'changes  not,'  alid  •  Jesus ^^., 
Clirist '  is  still '  tho  same  yesterday,  to-day,  and  for  the  ages. ' " 

Which  jissures  us  of  His  unrepelfl^ini;  performance  of  all 
that  Hp  has  threatened,  as  of  all  that  ^|Ie  has  promised. 

"  And  the  very  context  of  the  passage  which  describes  the  cast- 
ing of  the  wicked  into  the  lake  of  fire,  seems  to  sliow  that  this 
resurrection  and  the  second  death  are  both  parts  of  thd%amo  re- 
deeming jilan,  whiclk necessarily  in^lvcs  judgment  on  those  who 
^ill  not  judge  themselves,  and  have  not  accepted  the  loving  judg-  - 
ments  and  sufferings  which  in  thisTife  prepare  tha^riit-born  Jfor 
-the  first  resurrection.  So  we  read,^-'  And  He  that  sat  upon  tho 
throne  said.  Behold,  I  ruako  all  thing^inew  .  .  .'  He  that  over- 
cometh  shall  inherit  all  things;  and  I  triU. be  His  God;  and  he 
shall  be  my  son.  But  the  fearful  and  unbelieving,  and  the  abom- 
inable, and  murderers,  and  whoremongers,  and  sorcerers,  and 
idolators,  and  all  liars,  shajl  haye  their  p^vi  in  the  lake  which  ^ 
bunieth  with  firrf^  and  brimstone ;  which  b\  tha  second  death. ' 
What  does  He  say  here  but  that  'all  things  shall  be  made  new,' 
though  in  the  way  to  this  the  fearful  and  unbelieving  mupt  pass 
.the  lake  of  fire  ? "-         .     .  ,. 

He  says  the  very'  o]pposite.  For  instea^l  of  *1  passing " 
the  lake  of  fire,  He  says  they  "  have  t/icir part''  m  it,  as  the 
saints  have  theirs  in  the  first  resurrectiojj!.  And  these  (or  • 
among  these)  are  they  who«have  their  "  part  "  taken"\!>ut  of 
the  book  of  life  (xxii.  19)  of  whom  Mr.  JukSs  teaches  they 
,  have  their  part  then?  really  Mill.         s*v  *?^    .  ^ 

Morever  it  is  only  as  to  the  condition  of  the  blessed  that      ; 
God  says,  "Behold,  I  mak6  all  things  new,"  as  the  context    1 
proves.     ''  He  that  overoometh,  I  wjpil  be  his  God,  and  he    ~  • 
shall  be  my  son;  hut^^ — but  what?     He  that  overcometh 
not  shall  be  also  in  the  end  my  son?  '  No,  surely,  "  but  the 
fearful  and  unbelieving,  etc.,  shall  have  (heir  part  in  tlie  lake 
offire."    Mr.  Jukes'  explanation  is  a  destruction  of  the  sense, 
a  sense  which  is  aa  plain  as  can  be.     But  ag^in  he  says : — 

"The  'second  death '  thefef ore,  -so  far  from  bemg,  as  some,* 
think,  the  hopeless  shutting  up  of  man  forever  in  the  curse  of 
disobedience,  will,  if  I  err  not,  be  God's  way  to -free  those  \\^6        * 
in  uu.othet-  Avay  than  by  such  a  death  can  be  delivered  out  of  the 


^... 


lii 


i!!' '' 


|K        -  . 


348         FACTS  AXD  ^HEOBlteS  AS  TO  At  OttTRE  STaTE. 

,     dark  world  whose  life  they  live  in.  ...  To  get  out  of  -this  T^orld" 
there  is  but  one  way,"  dealh ;  not  the  first,  for  that  is  passed,  but 
the  secoud  death,     Eveu  if  we  have  not  light  to  see  this,  ouglit 
uot  the  present  to  teach  us  something  of  'God's  future  ways  ;  foi^  \ 
is  Ho  uot  thft  same  yesterday,  tq-day,  and  forever  ?  "' 

,  So  it  is  "  Ihrever''  now,  instead  of  « to  the  ajes  "  /  but 
'*  now  i^  the  acgepted  tinip,  heholA,- now  is  the  day  of  lalva- 
tloti."  Is  the  day  of  judgment  and  of  wrath  stifl  the  samt;  ? 
If  tiod  is  (as  of  course  He  must  be)  essentially  always  the 
same,  does  that  marke  grace  and  wrath  the  saine  ?  or  judg- 
ment  and  salvation  ?  Does  it  not  rather  aissure  us  that  He* 
Avho  has  threatened  will  make  good  ?  And  that  the  word 
will  fully  be  sustained,  '^  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son 
shall  not  see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him  "  ? 
Is  it  no  perversion  of  the  truth  of  His  unchangeableness,  to 
say  that  His %rath  abideth  not,  and  all  shall  linallv  "see 
life"?    Hegoeson:—  *  "^ 

"  We  know  that  in  inflicting  present  death,  His  pregent  pur- 
pose IS  to  destroy  him  that  has  the  power  of  death,  that  is  the 
•   devil. 'ig^'  -  ' 

We  know  nothing  of  the  kind;  it  is  O/iris^s  death,  not 
ours,  which  does  this.  Has  Mr.  Jukes  read  the  next  words 
in  the  text  he  quotes  ?    . 

"  How  can  wo  conclude  from  this,  that  in  inflicting  the  second 
death,  the  unchanging  God  will  act  on  a  principle  entirely  difier- 
(Mit  from  that  which  now  actuates  Him  ?  " 

That  is,  again,  why  should  a  day  of  salvation  and  a  day 
of  judgment  differ  in  character  ?  But  as  to  death  itself  the  ' 
principle  is  not  different;  for  as  the  first  death  is  the  judg- 
*nent  upon  the  natural  world,  so  the  second  death  is  upon 
the  world  beyond  the  grave  for  those  who  endure  it.  And ' 
as  the  first  is  final  as  to  this  present  scene,  the  second  will 
1)0  as  to  that.  •  , 

"  And  why  should  it  be  thought  a  thing  incredible  that  God 
should  raise  the  dead,  who  for  their  sin  suflfer  the  penalty  of  the 
second   death?    Does  tlii^  death  exceed  the  power  of  Christ  to 


overcome  it? 


Or  shall  the  greater  foe  still  triumph,  while  the 


THE    AtOCALYl'TIC    WtOlfS.      '  MQ\ 

-•.         ■  ■   ■•'        ■  ■*■;  ■  •  ■     -r  '  '  ' '  ,.'♦  . . 

lessVthe  flfet  denjfti^  is  surely  overcome  ?  Who  .has  taught  ^us 
thus  to  limit  th<'ni<'iining  of  the  words,  '  Death  is  swallowed  up  in 
victory'?" 

I  answer  to  the  last  <iue8tion,  God  Himself;  if  1  Cor.  x  v. 
be  inspired  of  Him,  For  the  apostfe  there  tells  lis  that  it  is 
fulfilled  at  the  resurrection  of  the  body^and  that  is  no  ques- 
tion of  the  seeond  death  at  all.  Nor  is  the  second  death 
Christ's  foQ/asth^  first  deatb  is.  For  the  first  death  does 
;  (while  it  lasts)  prevent  the  fulfilment  of  the  eternal  purppse 
fully,  Whether  with  saint  or  sinAer.  The  second  death  does 
not,  and  is 'not  an  enemy,  as  I  have  before  replied  to  Dr. 
Chauncey.  v^  to  what  is  "credible,"  all  is  that  God 
reveals.     This  He  has'not(revealed,  but  theVery  opposite. 

"  Is  God's  '  ^ill  to  save  all  men '  limited  to  fourscore  years,-or 
cliauged  by  that  event  whidi  we  call  death,  but  which  we  are 
distinctly  told  is  His  appointed  means  for  o'tn^'deliverance  ?" 

We  are  not  told  this  as -to  physical  death.  Are  tfieTaints 
who  do  not  die,  but  are  changed  at  the  Lord's  coming,  not 
delivered?  God  would  indeed  have  all -men  to  be  savdd, 
but  this  is  not  purpose  or  counsel,  which,  is  always  another 
word,*  but  (hsire.  "Ho^  often  ,%^ld  I,"  says  our  Lord 
as  to  JeVUsalem,  '^  mid  yeimuld  not.^'  And  "nmffia  the 
accepted  time  "  applies  only  to  living  men^  But  all  this  will 
come  up  again.clsewhere,  and  the  i^est  of  :gE?^ Jukes' argu- 
ments will  then  be  consideired  more  fittingly.  They  are 
based  upon  the  text  before  ug^«^      '  '        '     y      ' 

Thus  then  We  have  examined  every  objection  which  lias 
been  raised  to  that  simple  reading  of  this  important  Scrip- 
ture with  which  we  first  begajj.  We  have  surely  seen  that 
the  metaplfors  are  not  ambiguous,  but  written  in.  the  speech 
of  Him  w^io  cannot  lie,  nor  call  .by  the  name  of  "  revelation  " 
an  exaggerated,  or  at^lcast "  mysterious  and  highly-Wrought " 
account,  which,  when  reduced  to  the  "  sober  hue"  of  truth,' 
becomes  the  total  opposite  of  what  is  on  the   face  oi  it., 

*  /3ovXou<Xt;  fiovXtj  :  as  Matt.  xi.  27  ;  Luke.xxii.  42  ;  Acts  ii.  23 ; 
iv.  28;  xxvii.  42;  Eph.  j)  11 ;  Ilpb.  vi.  17,  elc.  Bat  we  shall  have  to 
recur  to  this  again. 


./^- 


«  "'  p   '^ 


,.!t 


Si 


M»''f 


,360  ^ .    JAtaTS  AIS^jp  TflIiOR|Ea  AS  TO  § .FUTUlffe 
Tha^k  .liijai  Hi$  J^ord  itiever  faUs  Mmstif 


witness^ 
first  sta 
has  hi 


lor  ca 


IItv 


U% 


UlJtO 


to  bb  brow-bba 
foi^  |fte  s^^lest  h<!)ri6#l|aarte     . 

^I'^'yj^^d^prBQpo^,  to .  re've: 


ii^^ 


it 


'."f;-  TJviits ,■*■>»■:■;      > 


v^:;.  * 


y;NS.— 3.  i 


.t;r':v(:  »vi' 


■A.H 


!      in 


K-l 


^^ ''.'//. ^Ml?  ■"■:-;■■'  <:;  ;!-i  ■■i*' 

3E|ij<^ki^miliaii& (trf  oiirliio^t  passage  will  not  det^^iVjM 
F^'^^^'l^S*' 9^  tl*9  ^^umen^  \pt^  Vegard  to  it  is  .neccssarilvT"' 
pfja^^^^^lHar' nature  to^i^iat  :h^S(  bcont  already  adyanccilik. 
oh' citfa^l^iM':    [It  is,  howe|'«r,  :||ijk>i)!ai:ato.;and  indepchderit^^ 
testirti0,ny^tfce  dGst*«y  ofithb  mck6<|  *an,d  as  such  wd  n^iist 
not  pasialiJ^jy.     It  reads  tht^ ;-—"•,  ^^     "  .    ^       '    '  i    V 

'i^yaditl|^- tliii?<l  angel  followed  tli^,  ^^^j^S  ^%  ^  \^^^  "'^oiel,; 

^;^n:i^il|  worship  the' beast anAhii^'iinfig^,  and  receive  his  maifk 

liisfoi^ahead  or|4n  his  hand,  the  same  shall  drink  of '|ihe  Mni^j^,.* 

of  'me  ^TVjiH^bf  'God;  which  is  poured  out"wit^out  mixture  ift!ti  ji' i 

the  '^up^bflWis  inc^ignation  ;  and^he  shall  be  tormented  mth  fire 

and  brfpastone  in- the  presence  of  the  holy  angels,  and  j^n  the 

preseri?^f 'the  Lanib  ;  and'the  smoke  of  their,torm*ent  ascendeth 

4;     '  j,'up  forever  and^ever  (for  ages  of  ages)  ;  and^tlrey  have  norestdi^ 

{    ;  ^'  nor  flight,  ^Ijo  worship  .the  beast  and, lit* iiriage,  "and  whosoe^ 

i        J  receivetli,  tlie  mark  of  his  name  "  (Kev.  xiv.  9-11); 

•  -4^       One  AVOuM'tliink  that  ^^«K>^ii^  as  it  Is  solerai 
Mr.  Morris;  r'  putting  to  tli(pR)of"  instead  of  "  toj 
could  scarcely  much. darken  it.     He  has  noticed  the  jjl 
'       Kowbver,  and  o||ect8  to  its  teaching  the 'commonly  re^ 
y   ',    doctrine  on  tnese  grounds  : — r 
iy,':^:.-     !•  It  is  thelpenalty  of  a  specific  crime,  and  therelore 

not  be  the  4pbm  of  those  who  have  not  committed  that 
crime.     Therefore,  if  it  teach  endlbss  woe   for  some,  that 
,d!innot  bo  the  r  common  penalty  due  to  sinnbrs. 


But  Mr.  Moh-is  i".  n-irniii  a**  fiti]'  ;  for  licll-firo  may 


THE  APOCALYPTIO  VISIONS. 


351 


**  QomiA^l|penaity  of  sinners,  and  yet  men  be  solemnly  warned, 
l^^l^^^wihat  once  let  them  commit  the  sin  in  question  and 
^eli  would  be  thei^y  portion.     What  is  intended  very 
y  is  that  tor  such  persons  there  would  be  no  escape 
(jection  is  th6refore  vain. 

2.  3Ir.  Morris  s^ya,  that,  whatever  may  be  the  "  dramatic 
forc^  "  of  what  is  said,  "  it  is  eifidetU  that  it  transpires  on 
earth,  and  before,  the  coming  of  the  Lord." 

But  he  gives  no  evidence  for  this  at  all,  unless  "it  is  evi- 
dent "be  considered  such.  I  should  think  myself  that  "  the 
presence  Oi  the  holy  angels  and  of  the  Lamb,"  would  rather 
ma,ke  the  opposite  evident. 

3.  He  appeals  to  the  "  smoke  of  Babylon  rising  up  for- 
.ever"  (ch.  xix.  3),  as  showing  that  such  words  do  not  imply 

tihe  necessary  existence  of  the  sufferers,  as  Babylon  had  been 
'^utterly , burned  with  fire."  But  this  we  have  looked  at  in 
our  reply  to  Mr.  Minton  on  the  previous  text. 

The  comments  of  the  rest  of  annihilationist  writers  are  no 
better  than  thi».  >  Mr.  Dora^y's  main  argument  is   that 

. "  the  advocates  of  any  tenet-^no  matter  what — must  be  hard 
driven,  jC  they  are  glad  to  take  their  stand  among  the  hiero- 
glyphs that  attract  us  to  the  isle  of  Patmos."  If -he  had 
be^n  one  of  those  "foolish  Galatians"  whom  the  apostle 

.  reljukes  Vith  the  stat|MMi|j^J^a£  1p^^  had  two  sons," 

'^tcl,  he  would,  of  qpMfei^lSreSb'^glj^a  argument 

against  'th(fkpo^.  ^et  ho  Will^ori^scend  tb^  notice  the 
"  hieroglyphs  ;"^d  the  s^C(tid  aitgument  M  protdofcel  Is, 

'Sthat  "  their  tbrmefit  is  in  v^rMl  representi^d  as  syn^rpfidul 
witlf  th§;pworshi|) :  '  they  who  loorshij}  tfee  beast  ^)i^e  no 

'j;est.'"    The  Tscholarship   of  which  is  i|&t' pl*ofo«ii4 :' as  I 
suppose  ni  Ttpo6Huyovyrf<;  slihply  to  mean ^'  theji^orshipoers;" 
without  any  distinction d£  whether. |he  worship  were" m  '" 
present  or  the  past,l|||^ffl|^ver'if  '^  have  nare^^gw 
the  worship  and  the  ^SwHE  bo  synchronous,  ,th(^  "  aAai 
be  tormented  "  must  shoijj^ii  reverse  ^s  to  the  torment. 


'  Bui  Mr.  Pobney 
'    the  slints  as 


ay  (ioi|0u 


farther  fr 


rora  the  omission 
|^^alj^pg\dth  t^"  angels  and  the 


■^' 


'■M 


352 


Facts  and  theobies  as  to  a  future  state* 


« ,j , 


Lamb  "  "  that  the  vengeance  denounced  is  inflicted  here  on 
earth,  jjnd  in  the  time  state,"  which  must  last,  therefore,  as 
the  tprment  lasts,  for  the  ages  of  ages  !  And  again;  "  that 
•  in  subsequent  chapters  we  have  the  fulfilmenj;  of  these  very 
threatenings  exhibited;  which  fulfilment  indisputably  tstkcs 
place  here  and  now."  Certainly  the  fulfilment  is  found  in 
ch.  XX.,  and  we  have  been  looking  at  it  already,  but  he  who 
can  believe  that  the  torment  of  individuals  here  and  no\t 
can  be  "for  ages  of  ages  "  must  be  very  anxious  to  believe  • 
it.     We  need  scarcely  follow  him  there. 

Nevertheless,  Mr.  Hudson  also  agrees  that  the  passage 
"  refers  properly  to  the  >scenes  of  time,  and  not  to- the  final 
judgment ;  "  his  first  argument  being  that  there  is  "  no  allu- 
sion to  the  resurrection  or  to  the  opening  of  the  books  "I  ... 
"  And  the  very  expression  '  who  worship  tlje  beast  and  his 
.imago,  sefem«  (!)  to  refer  to  the  earthly  conduct  and  condition 
of  idolatrous  people.  The  passage  proves  an  earthly  im- 
mortality, if  it  proves  any."  I  need  not  waste  timo  upon 
these  arguments.  :    ,  •  ;; 

Mr.  Constable*8  remarks  do  not  call  for  much  attention 
either.  "  Elliot,"  he  tells  us,  "  has  no  hesitation  in  referring 
Rev.  xiv.  10,  11,  together  with  the  kindre'd  passage  in  r 
xix.  8,  to  a  temporal  judgment,  viz.,  the  swallowing  up  by 
__yolcanic  fire  of  the  territory  of  Rome  in  Italy."  Ak 
to  which  our  readers  are,  we  think,  in  a  position  to  judge  for 
themselves.  But  Mr.  Constable  does  not  himself  insist  upon 
this;  he  will  take  the  passages  in  their  usual  application, 
but  only  insist  on  their  being  images  of  "death  and  destruc- 
tion," for  Ayhich  we  have  had  his  arguments  under  the  previ- 
ous texts. 

Mr.  Minton  too  unites  this  with  the  passages  in  Rev.  xx., 
there  being  only  one  argument  exclusively  relating  to  it,  a«d 
that  is  its  inconsistency  (understood  in  the  orthodox  way) 
with  2  Thess.  i.  9.  "The  torment  is  said  to  take  place  *in  the 
presence  of  the  Lamb.'  But  in  2  Thess.  i.  9,  those  who  are 
found  in  opp^ition  to  Christ  at  His  coming,  are  *  punished 
with  ^^^^^^^K  destruction;^/'o/«  (away  from)  the  presencfl 


It 


'.   ^      .  -  I  ■  ■■    .  ■ 

TSE   APOCALYPTIC   visions!    "* 


X 


353 


I'  'f 


of  the  Lord.'  They  aro  *  gatherea  out  of  Ilia  kingdom  *  and 
cast  into  outer  darkness,  away  from  the  .manifested  ^esenoe 
of  Christ  during  the  millennial  age." 

But  the  "from"  in  Thess^lonians  does  not  mean  ^* away 
from."  We  have  already  examined  the  passage,  which  Mr. 
Hudson  rightly  compares  with  Acts  vti.  19  to  prove  this. 
If  it  did,  it  by  no  means  follows  that  the  torment  Is  always 
in  the  presence  of  the  Lamb  or  of  the  holy  angels,  but  that 
the  judgment  will  be  executed  imder  their  eye.  They  will^ 
be  witnesses,  but  it  does  not  say  ctenial  witnesses, 

Gen.  Goodwyn  is  also  one  of  those  who  believe  that  the- 
ages  of  ages  expire  before  even  tlio  millennium,  tlkt  they 
areift  fact  commensurate  with  the  pouring  out  of  the  vials 
inth|  ICth  chapter!  -"'Che  wrath  of  God,"  he  says,  "the 
cause  df  their  torment,  is  nacer  spo/cen  of  in  connection  with 
the  final  j  11(1  f  mo  it  of  the  inlcked,  nor  has  it  any  reference  to 
hell  and  its  fur.'''  It  seems  he  has  never  read  the  aposVe 
Paul's  words  about  "  indignation  and  wkatii  upon  every 
soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil  .  .'.  in  the  day  wben  God  shall 
judge  the  secrets  of  men  by  Jesus  Christ  "  (Rdjti.  ii.  8,  16). 
"It  is,  on  the  contrary,'*  hc.|dds,  "  identified  here  with  the 
seven  vials  that  will  be  pouroct  out  '  hjmh  the  earthy  previous 
to  the  advent  of  the  Lord  in  glory  (2  Tliess.  i.  !))  which  are 
called  '  the  vials  of  the  wrath  of  God.'"  ,  IIow  id'jntified  he 
does  not  further  say,  and  h  is  liard  to  understand;  for 
"previous  to  the  ad venWof Ma.'  Lord"  seefns  as  iQuch 
opposed  to  "  in  the  prlwH  of  th-j  Lamb,"  as  do  "the*  ages 
of  ages  "^^  the  \;cry  shoftperiod  comparatively^bf  the  pour- : 
mgout  oF^he  vials.,  , The  series  of  mistakes  founded  uj)pn 
these  fundamental  ones,  we  scarcely  need  examine:  .,  / 

Finally  Mr.  Robert^  his  «  Man  Mortal,"  obj^igtg  to  the 
orthodox  view,  in  averj^sirailar  way  ;i--  t'«  .^      . 

'    "  1.  [The  orthodox]  *  wrsithof  God-'  in  n  wnith  alwa^ 
in  hell  from  gciieratiou  to  gcuoriition,  whfroaa  tlip 
Apocalypse  i|^  wrath  that  Scomea'  iit  a  particntf 


M 


affairs  on  earth,  when  the  d 
On   tb^  contrary,,  the 


e  raised." 
ment  of  h 


^^^•» 


■■^■: 


^r- 


k 

^ 


,•^1 


»»» 


'%■ 


t   4   • 

7 


354        FACTS  AND  •niEORlES  AS  TO  A  FUTiyiE^^Jfi. 

Bense,— of  Gehenna,  has  not  yet  come'  lor  iny  o^e ;  ana  its 
coming  at  a  particular  junoture  Js  not  in  dppositlon  to  its 
abiding  when€i£Hoes  come.  .  ••♦ 

".2.  [The  ^drHRidox]  sufferers  of  hell-fire  uro  immortal  souls, 
while  the  apdfc^yptic  drin^epi  of  the  wine  of  the  wruth  of  God 
uro  *  men,'  \^^  *  forehd|ds  '  aud  *  hauils.'  "       , 

This  is  jitlerly  false,  as  Mr.  Roberts  must  know,  for  we 
all  believd.that  Goct^^viU '' destroy  both  bodi/ and  soul  in 
hell,"  and  in  point  o£  filet  it  is  only  those^  in  the  body  that 
,  go  into  it.      '  '     '  ^ 

"3.  [The  orthodox],  hell-fire  is  endured  in  hell,  in  banishment    ? 
from  the  p^jl^ee  of  Clmst  and  the  angels,  while  the  apocalyptic 
torment  iu  fire  and  brimsjll^e  is  inflicted  in  the  presence  of  the 
holy  angels,  and  in  the  prcs^co  of  the  Lamb. " 

This  is  the  old  confusion  beW<^'Tfli(^ir  being  witnesses 
and  eternal  wituGsscH,  U'hich  we^^vc  bo-fbre  remanced  upon. 

"4.  .[The  orthodox]  hell  ffl^vayj^tu  earifc,  in  souife  distant 
trdlispatihl  region  without  smid  standing  ground,  whereas  the 
.scencij^f  Rev.  xiv.  is  enaetdtl  inihg  presence  of  the  Lamb,  *after* 
the  Lamb  haj!$eome  to  Mount  ^^^  etc.  .i^  -  "v^     "^If"    '    «- 

'j*?^  The  passage  in  Rev.  xij^,  says  not  otie  wcu*^4bout  thaif** 
locality  ^"  hell  at  all,  but  merely  thre^ena^pl^worshippers 
of^e  beasit  that  they  shall  endure  it^flfe  ismrver^said  tbbe  ' 
on  earth..: -•..    .   ^..  ■  .     '.■■.  ^'.     --.mFrnk--    ■---■«^-" 

This    cloies  ,  lie    arguments   as  t(^  the^  passages,  the 
strengtiPK*  which  is  only  t be  more  brought  out  by  all  such 
efforts.4to  evade  thek-  force.     The  simplest  interpretation 
still,  approves  itself  the  only  consistent  one,  after  repeated 
exaniinations  and  criticism  by  those  who  lack  neithfer  will 
nor  mental  capacity,  but  who  fail  here  utterly  and  hopelessly, 
beca^kg  in  conflict  with  the  word  of  One  who  cannot  lie  nor 
<^ange,  nor  mock  with  needless  mystery  the  souls  of  the  ,. 
simplest  among  Aose  who  "  read  or'  hear  the  wgrds  of  the    - 
book  of  this  pfo^iecy,"  and  Avhom  He  pronounces  "  blessed,"- 
if  they  "  keep  the  things  which  arc  Written  therein."     It  is — 
learned  men  who  have  unwittingly  devised  entamrlements 
for  tho  feet  of  these  simple  ones,  until  they  have  learned  to 

'I*       ,  ■  '    ■    ■■ 


ositlon  to  its 


tancrlements 


'# 


"EVEntASTlJTa  PUN'IsnMFNT"  IS   MATT.  XXV.       355 

Stand  in  doubt  of  that  which  they  own  to  be  God's  word, 
hccauM  of  the  interpretations  which  have  been  put  upon  it! 
If  the  Sop  of  I\ran  eoininnr  i„  the  douds  of  licaven  and  all 
mOw^y  angels  with  Ilini  may  mean  ^  taking  of  a  Jewish 
city,  no  wonder  tliat  they  need  a  leaiHd  man  to  tell  them 
80.    And^^this  is  the  Scripture  mode  of  speech,  no  wonder 
if  It  shouh?>be  thought  "  highly  wrought  and  mysterious  "— 
mfl^ited  and  exaggerated  rather  :  and  if  this  be  its  cOrrnnfm 
morle,  who  would  seek  out  (as  expecting  to  make  aught  of 
them)  fi|^"  hieroglyphs  of  Patmos  "  ? 
It  wjll»a  a  mattef  of  tlie  greatest  thankfulness  to  me,  if 
.art^fr<5mthe  subiect  of  special  interest  to  us  now)  any 


slfoU  learn  J|the  long  discussion  which  we  have  gone 
through,  hiiri-uo^nd  trjist worthy Js  the  word  of  God- 
how  little  it  "  refl«|the  ignorance  of  a  dark  age  "  ;  how 
Ignorant  rather  is  IRe-ltarning  which  would  belittle  it 
"Heaven  ancUarth  shall  pass  away  "-and  the  voice  is  that 
of  the  Lord  an^  Maimer  of  heaven  and  earth—' '  but  my  words 
shall  not  pass  av\by.'' 

AVe  must  now  return  to  look  at  a  text  designedly  left  to 

-the  present,  although  its  fitter  place  might  seem  to  be  lone 

before,  masmuch  as  it  is  the  judgment  of  the  nations  at  the 

coming  of  the  Lord. 


#. 


CHAPTER  XXXVI. 

"  EVEIlLAf$1*iN-ft  PUXISnirKk:T  "  WSfATt.  J35:iy^  ■       V^^  ^ 

It  is  not  needfulj^  our  present  pui^oso  to  establish  the 
-  particular  oj^Mcaf; on  of  what  has  been  strangely  called  bv 
&omcthe."parable"of  the  sheep  and  the  gc^ts.  It  is  ii^ 
deed  no-para^e,  but  a  very  simple  statement  of  the  separa- 
tion  of  the  living  uj^ri  the  earth  when  the  Lord  comes  to  it 
and  sets  np  His  tlirone  there,  which  separation  is  comjmred 
to  a  shepherd  separating  fs  sheep  from  the  goats.  It  is 
therefore  a  part  of _that  pre^millonniJ?!  judgment  of  the  quick 


'«• 


'■h^ 


356        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  B-UTUBE  STATfi. 

-  already  spoken  of,  ind  which  precedes  by  more  than  a 
thouwiiid  years  the  jud«,'nient  of  the  dea<l  before  the  great 
white  thmne.  VViih  this  it  lias  been  identified  in  the  popu- 
lar view.  Hiinpjy  because  the  Lord's  eoniini^  havhig  been 
considered  to  be  at  the  end  of  the  world,*  distinction  be- 
tween the  two  was  not  possible.  j 

But  the  result  has  been  a  disastrous  one.  For  the  judg- 
ment in  the  one  case  being  evi<lently  a  <liscrirainative  one 
it  was,  of  course,  considered  that  the  risen  saints  were  to  be 
picked  out  from  sinners  by  the  trial  of  their  works;  and 
then  the  natural  suggestion  followed,  that  all  miist  wait  till 
the  day  of  judgment,  to  know  what  was  to  be  their  everlast- 
ing cottdition.  I  do  not  need  again  to  enter  into  this,  but  I 
shall  briefly  state  the  distinction  which  the  passages  them- 
selves show  as  obtaining  between  them. 
- 1.  The  judgment  in  Matthew  is  evidently  (and  stated  to 
be)  when  the  Lord  comes,  a  coming  connected  with  various 
features  of  the  previous  part  of  the  prophecy,  M'hich  make 
indisputable  its  character.  That  in  Rev.  xx.  11-15  takes 
place  when,  instead  of  His  coming  to  earth  the  earth  and 
the  heavens  flee  away. 

2.  In  Matthew  there  is  no  resurrection,  and  the  judgment 
is  of  the  living  "nations,"  not  of  the  dead;;  while  the  con- 
trary is  true  of  that  in  Kevelation. 

3.  In  Matthew  'they  are  judged  according  to  their 
behavior  to  some  whom  the  King  styles  His  "brethren": 
in  Revelation  judged  in  general  "accordihg  to  their  works." 

These  are  distim^tioiis  which  are  simpje  enougli  and  broad 
enough  between  the  two  scenes  to  prevent  their  being  con- 
founded. There  is,  however,  a^>oint  of  resemblance,  and  it 
is  on  this  account  that  I  have  left  the  passag:o  in.  Matthew  t<) 
the  present.time,  tliat,  instead  of  being  slam  by  the  sword  lis 
those  are  who  follow  the  beast,  they  on  the  left  hand  receive 
a  judicial  sentence,  and  are  a<ljudg(Ml  to  the  lake  of  fire 


as- 


■/ 


are  those  in  the  Apocalyptic  vision^but,  as  it  would  seem 


*  The  expression  in  Matt.  xiii.  and  xxiv,!^  before  noticed,  is  not^s, 
but  is  "  llie  coniplotion  "  (or  'c<>n--ununati<>i)  ')  "  of  tlie  a^e  -* 


^«;' 


»> 


"  BVEULASTlko  PUNISHMENT »'  IN  MATT.  XX 7.         857 

before  tho  millennium/as  the  beast  and  the  false  prophet  are. 
I  do  not  say  i.ositively  that  tliey  go  directly  into  it,  but  so 
it  would  seem.  It  is  certain  that  they  are  appointed  to  "  ever- 
lasting, punishment"  in  "  everlasting  tire,  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels." 

Men  have  come  in  with  their  explanations  again  here,  and 
to  these  we  must  turn.  They  have  to  do  chiefly,  as  our 
argument  has,  witli  the  expressions  "  everlasting  punishment 
and  "  everlasting  fire." 

With  regard  to  -  everlasting  punishment,"  the  objections 
to  the  ordinary  sense  are  various,  some  based  upon  the  word 
for  everlasting,  some  upon  that  for  punishment,  some  upon 
considerations  apart  from  the  meaning  of  either  word,  while 
some  combine  several  .of  these  objections  together!  Wo 
must  first,  in  the  natural  order,  look  at  the  word  "punish- 
raent,"  for  which  several  other  renderings  are  suggested— 
"cutting  oftv'  "restraint,"  but  especially  "correction,"  tho 
word,  as  It  is  stated  by  Mr.  Jukes  for  example,  being  "  always 
used  for  a  corrective  discipline,  which  is  for  the  improvement 
of  him  who  suffers  it."*  ' 

The  word  for  "punishment"  here  is  H6\a6i<i  iholasis)  an<f 
18  given  by  Liddell  and  Scott  as  moan;^"  a  pruning  "  •  hence" 
a  checking,  punishing,  chastisenia/^rlction,  punisbment." 
The  verb  WaCcu,  from  which  it^sWx^^d/means^Btrictly- 
to  curtail,  dopk,  prune,  but  usually  to  kbep  within  bounds, 
hold  in  check,  bridle,  check,  then  to  chastise,  correot/  pun- 
ish.     The  words  derived  from  this  show  a  sinular  meaning, 
riius    we  find     ^a>Aatf/^.t,   "chastisement,    punishment"- 
Hokec6Tv  loy,  "a  plftce  of  chastisement,  prison,"  or  2,  "an  in' 
strmnent^of  correction  or  torture  »•  KoXacJr^..  «a  phastiser, 
punisher^^'    A^a.^o,  is  the  word  used  for  J.^.«M,  Acts  iv! 
-i,     finding  nothing  how  they  might  i>MnM  them,"  and 
again  2  Pet.  ii.  9,  "  to  reserve  the  iiiyust  to  the  day  of  judg- 
ment  ioh^panisheii:^    KoXadi,  isunly  found  in  the  p^sage 
before  us,  and  in  1  John  iv.  18  :  «  fear  hath  ^ome>/^.»'        ^- 
All  is  against  the  rendering  of  "cutting  off,"  which  is 

*  liestitmion,  1).  129.  ~  " 


^m'  : 


■w~ 


'*. 


358         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUlRE  STATE. 

'■adopted   by   Ellis Jind   Read,*  Blain,t  Storrs,t  Hastings,^ 
Morris,  and  even  on' the  orthodox  side  hy  Landis.||     Blairi 
adopts  Ellis  and   Read's  rende^ini?,  "  And  th.cse  will  go  to 
the  cutt ing  oil'  that  takes  pla^e  at  tht*  age ,"  !    Morris  says  that 
jt  refers  to  the  "  cutting  off"  of  false  Christians' from' the 
^ock  bf  Christ,  and  from  every  pretence  to  the  kingdom.'*!! 
fAnd  even  as  to  1  John  iV,  18,  he  says  that  its  being  repre- 
sented  by   ",torraent"    "is   not  justifiable;  for.  the   Aj^bi^d 
rel&tes  to  the  children  of  God,  who  are  not  yet  !  made  per 
feet '  in  an  experimental  knowledge  of  the  love  of  Qpd.    They 
are  not  tormeuted ;  but  they  are  cut  off;;.from  much  exp^si- 
'  mental  bles.^edn^ss,  which  properly  pertains  to  them."    .But 
this  is  poor  and  foolish  reasoning.     The^ words  are  '■\f}ar— 
i.  e.,;irlread  of  God— hath  torment,"  and  so  it  has  whfthei>^in 
saint  or  siTiner.     "Cutting  off"  (as. he  would  have  it  here 
also)  it  never  is,  being  never  simply  that,  as  the  dictionaries 
show,  and  as  even  Mr.  Hudson,  who  has  no  prejudice  cer- 
tainly against  the  word,  admits.     He  says,  "This  (meaning 
of  *  excision  *— cutting  off)  seems  to  be  supported  by  the 
cognate  xoXo/Soeo,    and  by  the  origiMl  sense  of  'pruning.' 
But  in  prun^g  the  tree  is  not  '  cut  off '—only  the  braiiches. 
And  though,  by  the  laws  of  language,  the  word  inlf/ht  easily 
have  acquired  this  sense,  we  find  no  proof  that-  it  //r<.v'-  done 
so."**  •  This  argument  is  thus  fairly  given  up. 
.The  renderings  by  "  restraint,"  Mr.  Hudson  says,  "is 'fa- ' 
vored   by  the   use   of  the   present   tense   in   2   Pet.   ii.   9 
{HoXaloMei^ou?^   comp.  ver.  4 ;  Jude  G ;  and.  perhaps    Acts  - 
iv.  21),  and  by  ^  remark  of  Schleusner.     It  is  favored  by  the 
tenor  e^varipus  pa^^es,  which  represents  the  Avicked'as  the 
troublers  0f  the  rifhteous,  to  be  effectually^  restrained  % 
God^s  final  judgtqents.ft     But,"  he  adds,4'thi8  idea  is  ndk,i 

*   Bible  versus  Tradition.       _  t  I^eaili  not  Life,  p.  79 

•      1  Six  Sermons,  p.  59.        .  ,       .,.         ^  Pauline  Theology,  p.  59,; 
II  Iramoiitality-ofthe  Soul,  p.  480.  <If  WhaVis  ManT  pp.  WO, 

**Dot)tand  Orjace,  pp.  189,J90.      *   ,  '    * 

''^ft  Up  gives  the  following  texts :  Psa.  xxxvii.;  Ixxiii.;  xcii.;  Isa.  Ixti 
24  ;  Dan.  xii.  2,  Z  ;  Matt.  xiii.  40t43,  ;  2  Thess.  i.  (^0  ;  2  Pet.  ii.  4-12  •' 


^^^ 


r,t- 


iV 


.* 


>  "BVliBtASIIWO  I'UMlSilMllNi"  is   MATT.  XXV.       350 

"^^  prominent  in  "Matt.  J^iv,,  and  such  a' rendering  would  ^j 
hardly  tenable,"  -  ,  y 

The  word  certainly  would  notler^c  th6  cause  of  anpihila* 
tiomsra,  nor  even  of  restorationism,  if  the  ^"  restraint  "  is  to- 
be  «  everlasting."  This  meaning,  however,  connects  with 
that  which  restorationists.  would  give,  according  to  the  pas- 
sage  Which  Mr.  Hudson  quotes  from  Eustathiu.^,  "7voVltk(J/g 
IS  properly  a  certain  kin#. of  punishment;  that  is,  a  certain 
chastimng  and  restraining- of  the  disposition,  i,ii  not  vimlic 

iris  qn  the  ground  that  the  word  CNprcsses,  not  vindictive' 
"but  corrective  suffering,  that  Mr.  Jukes  ^nd  Dr.  Farrar  take 

•  their.  ?tand.     The  latter  affirms  that  "  KoAatJ/s  ig  ^   ^vord- 
^    wljidr  in  its  «(>^i  proper  meailhigr  '  luis  Reference  to  the'co^  ' 

i'ixjtioivaiia  bettering  of,  him  that  endures  it.'  ^**     Mr..Juke8 
a^s,  tliat  '"those^wlio  hold  th^  cc^mmon  vi(jw  arc.  obliged 
t».*?^s  this,"  and  supports  this  by:an  appteal  to  Arch-' 
bish^renchV  "  Synonyms  of  ij.e  i^cNV  Testament,"  who 
distingUislirng  between  the  two  words w<;A*fer$  an(l»ri;fa,p/«. 
^ays,  "In  Tmoo,i,:a,  according  to  its  x^lassical  use,  the  vindife- 
.  tive  character  bf  the  puhisliment  isthe  ptbmincnt  thought; 
It  IS  the  Latin  '  ultio  '  •  punishnrcnt  as  satisfying  tlie  inflictefs 
sense  of  outraged  jiistice,  as  de|phdinghik  Own  honor  and  " 
that  of  the  violated  law  .  .;.  in  H6Xam^^'<yh  the  other  hand^ ' 

•  is  more  the  notioif  o\'  punishment  a»  it  has  reference;  to  the 
s   correction  *id  l>et%ing  of  himlthat  endures  it.^  to 

wffich  he  refcrs  to  Thilo,  Plato,  and  Clement  of  Alexandria, 
and  adds,  «  And  this  is  Aristotle Vdisrinctidft.'''^ 

It  is  triie  that  Ihe  Archbishop  i^esistk  the  restor'atiohist 
application  of  this.     He  says :  "It  would  'Tbe.a  ver>  seripus    , 
eriwhowevor  to  attenipt  to  refer  this 'distinction  in  its'en-' 
■  *"'*^fe#  '^''»'"*I*^  as  employed  i,i  thtf  Now  Testaments"    ^ 
;,  .Wv  Juke*^'' ttofhnu'nt  upon  this  is,^M,|i,it  is,4t  would  be  a  ' 
jj  ?P^^"s  Mw  to  givenhe  word  its   prefer  sei^e."     '^Why 
.;  :shoHld  ir  be  a  scripts  error, "asks  Dr.  Farrar,  *'t6  refrain 
'•'^!li!!^fi!^lj^^  *  ^^^^%  «erise  which  it  does  not  possess?  " 
-  *  Eternal  Hope,  p: '.JOO.  ~T~^^^  '■ 

iff  -.  '  *  * 


«    HI 


:^/" 


K 


~  -^ii 


A^ 


nl 


'#■.' 


'--*!* 


"^m 


w  „ 


3C0"        FACTS  AND  TIIEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

-  Archbishop  Trench  has,' however,  produced  witnesses  for 
this  latter  assertion,*  which  those  who  tak«  him  thus  to  task 
.~J>refer  to  disregard.  Indeed  it  cannot  be  shown  that  what 
Dr.  Farrar  considers  "theso/c  proper  meaning"  of  the  word 
is  ever  the  meaning  of  it,  eitKci"  in  the  Septuagint  or  the 
Apocryphal  writings,  in  which  we  have  certainly  better 
authority  for  the  meaning  of  word.s  in  tlic  Now  Testameirt 
than  can  possibly  be  foiind  in  Plato  or  Aristotle. 

It  occurs  six  times  in  the  Septuagint  of  Ezckiel :  twenty- 
one  times  in  the  Apocryphal  lAoks.  "  So  iniipiity  shall  not 
be  your  ?7/A/i  "  (p]zek.  xyiii.  30).  is  translated  ♦' your 7>/w*/.s7i- 

.  ineiity  In  a  passage  in  lEsilras,  we  find' thc;  disobedient 
enjoined  to  be  ^>«/iiMef?  whether  by  death  or  other  InJIlcUim^ 
*' penalty  of  mdney,  or^  imprisonment '' :  where  for  "rhfiiv- 

,  tion  ''  the  word  is  actually  the  very  word  said  tto  be  opposed 
BO  entirely  in  mining  to  HoAcxdfi, — "punished  by  n/nayjia  " ! 
and  where  death,  the  alternative  of  fine  and  itpprisonment, 
is  certainly  not  a  "corrective  dit^cipljne."  In  the  book  of. 
Wisdom  the  word  is  applied  to  the  punislmient  of  the  Egyp- 
tians, and  in  the  2  "Hfecc.  also  to  death.f 

t)T.  Farrar  can  scarcely  .be  acquitted  then,  either  of  super- 
ficial acquaintance  with  the  subjec-C  upon  \vhich  he  speaks, 
or  of  wilfully  shutting  his  eyes  to  the  facts  before  him,  some 
of  which  are  cited  in  Dr.  Trencli^'s  hook.     Even  in  the  Xew 

*  "  In  proof  tliat  HoAftdt?  liafl  acquiiod  hi  ITdleiiistic  Groi^k  tliiS 
severe  sense,  and  was  used  simply  ^s  pitiiislmiont  di-  tonnont,  with  no' 
necessary  urtderthought  of  the  betterinai  throu^Ii  it  of  him  who  endured 
it,  we  have  only  lo  refer  to  such  passages  as  tlie  following:  Josephus, 
.4}U.  XV.  2.  2;  Vhno,-De  A[/ricyl.O;  Mart.  Polyrdr,,'!;  «  Mace.  iv. 
38  ;  Wisd.  of  Sol.  xix.  4  "  (Syli.  of  Now  Test.  <)\-\\.).  '  ,. 

t  Prof.  Bartlett,  in  his  Life  and  Death  Eternal,  has  a  Umg  note  on  the. 
"  meaning  of  «oA«<Jr?,"  in  which  lie  brings  forward  a  number  of  other 
instances,  citing  among  the  rest  Plntarph.  the  fspuriotis)  second  epistle 
of  Clement,  and  the  Marfyrinm  Kolvcarpi.  -  The  list  of  ]>assajj|^n|()m  the 
Septuagint  and  Apocryyiha  is  as  follows  :  K/.ek.  \\\.  'A,  1,  7  [  w'Ttfr  80 ; 
xliii.  12;  xliv.  12 ;  1  Esdras  viii.  24;  Wisd.  iii.  4;  xl.T>.  0,  14, 17  ;  xii^ 
15",27;.xiv.  10;  xvi.  1,2,  9, '24;  xviii.  1|1.  22;  xix.4j  1  Mace.  vii.  7; 
2  Mace,  iv,  38;  <vi.  14;  SMacc.i.  3;  v!.8.   '  ;    ^ 

/•v"  '    '      ■  '      '^  "    ■""■'■ 


^    \ 


Q 


(jr 


■-  f 


■.■i 


\ 


"BVEIILASTING   PUNISHMENT"  IN  M4.TT.  XXV: 


861 


TeBt^eiit,  where  out  of  four  passage^  one  is  that  itt  dispute, 
the  evKlenco  is  certainly  agaiirst  him.  "Fear  hath  koW^," 
can  hahlly  roter  to  "correctivi,  <lisciplinc  » ;  'and  the  "pun- 
ishment" of.  the  wjcked  in  the  day  of  ju  jg,nent  wiiich  Peter 
speaks  ot,  we  have,  as  we  jbelieve,  more  right,  to  claim 
than  he.  * 

.  The^ord  means  then  i)racticaljy  in  th0  Hellenistic  Gfeek 
|f  the  New  Testament,  "^mnishment »  simply,  arid  the  mode 
61  punishment  it  does  not  expr^^ss.  Fine,  imprisonment, 
deijth  may  06me  under  the-  term  •  in  the  epistletf  John  (as 
wel  as  in  other  ijalssagosovtsi<le  of  Scripture)  it  can  scarcely 
imply  othoi^than  sulforhig  in  some  form.  Here  it  is  "  e.ver.- 
lasting  fire,  pf'cpared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels,"  and  that- 
we^ave  seen , is  torment :  ';  they,  shall  be  tpmentied  day  ah* 
night  loreyeratjd  ever."     '  •     .  -       , '^ 

But  arguments  pursue  us:.&till ;  for  to  yield  here  i^ould  be 
^  to  give  up  all.     These  turn  mainly  upop  the  teri^for  «  ever- 
...lasting,"  and  they  are  of  so  very  similar  nattfr%  that^^we* 
think  we  8\m  omit  nothing  if  we  allow  Mr.  Minto^  be  V 
their  expositor.  '  .  ■    ,,W0^ 

le  objects'Uat  «  evferlasting  punishm^t  "-x;  ^ J    .  /' 
^  an  exi)ressiou  taken  out  oi  a  nio^  ^(m^iifable,  andwhicl/ 
,8c:v*urs  nowhoro  else  m  the  whole  Bible:,  Hlji  iftoral  #  th^para- 
.  We.  IS  plum  enough.     But  in  that  asp,ct\  hls.no  be&ng  What- -  ^ 
ever  on  the  question.     It  is  only  in  its  prophetical  aspect  that  we 

This  is4e  cry  habitually  raised.     But  why  should  pro-  ' 
phetical  questions  be  a  difficulty,  >vhen  in  point  of  fact  people 
ofraIlknidsK>f  prophetical  belief  see  none,  and  agrae|ek4- 
^   ly  m^  the.r  iut(^rpretation  ?    As  to  being  a  "  parable,"  one 
verse  and  a  half  introduces  and  dismisses  ^1  that  is  in  it  of 
his  chai^te.     There  is  a  "simply comparison  of  thesepara-J- 
t.o„  the  Lora  makes  in  that  day;b^V.rfeen  the  rig^eous  and  : 
the  wicked:£o  a  shepherd  dividing  his  sheep /rom  the  goats  ^  . 
Uiien_mim^iately  the  righteous   ar?  called   «  sheep,'t;and 
^^>i^:\  r    ;*Way  Evadastiiig,"p.  41^  Ptc.~~-~^l!S''"^~  '■ 


p  thei 


«      I 


•^ 


>^?c 


H^ 


■■* 


^^36ii         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

the  wicked  "goals";  after  which,  instead  of  tlirt figure  being 
kept  up,  it'i|>immediately  dismissed,  and  this  language  never 
retuf n^d  t0  ;  and  the  details  are  quite  inconsistent  with  the 
figure  b^iipg  kept  up. 

Mr.  I^nton  goes  on : —  *  ' 

'^Whether  the  cwmt  it  refers  to  will  take  place  at  the  begin- 
uing,  or  at  the  end,  of  the  millennium  ;  whether  the  sheep  and 
the  goats  represent  «  nations  '  or  individuals,  and  in  either  ctwse 
n'hat  nations  or  individuals,— whether  Jew  or  Gentile,  Christian 
or  heathen,  true  and  false  professors  in  the  church  ;  and  lastly, 
who  are  Christ's  '  brethren,'  apparently  distinguished  both  from 
the  sheep  and  the  "goats  ;  all  these  questions  are  hotly  disputed.'' 

No  doubt;  but,  as  I  have  said,  it  has  little  to  do  with  the 
matter.  The  parabolic  nature  of  the  i)assage  has  been  niost 
unwarrantably  pressed,  and  as  a  consequence  a  veil  of  mys 
tery  has  been  thrown  oyer  what  is  yery  simpleUn  cliaracter. 
What  may  fairly  be  questioned,  as  for  instance  who  the 
"  brethren  "  of  the  King  may  be,  need  raise  no  question  touch- 
ing our  present  subject.  The  everlasting  punishment  into 
which  the  wicked  are  sent  away  is  deined  as  plainly  as  can 
be  to  be  "  everlasting  fire,  prepared  for  the  deViland  his 
angels."  It  may  be  doubtful  who  are  those  punished,  a|id 
when  they  are  ;  the  pui^fohment  itself  is  not  doubtful.*  ' 

"And  'yet  it  is  out  of  such  a  ijai-able  as  this,  that  a  term  is' 
chosen  to  be  unquestionably  the  msiin  pillar  of  so  stui>endous  ati 
edifice  as  the  theory  of  endless  misery,  and  to  be  the  name  by 
which  it  is  univorsally  known." 

The  name  may  well  express  the  doctrine,  and  thus  U^^ 


W 


*  I  <lo  not  mean  (hat  to  myself  these  questions  of  who  or  when  h,re  ' 
doubt  fill.     I  have  no  question  Ih^they  are  the  "  natioi.is  "  eyangeiizerl 
by  tlie  "  everlasting  gospel  "  (Rev.\xiv.  6,  7)  during  tile  interval  thaJb.  . 
elapsfrs  between  the  taking  away  of  the  saints  to  hf^aven,  aiirt  tlieff  ar.     ' 
pearing^ft  glory  with  the  Lord.     The  interval  is  of  swen  years  at  least ^ 
the  last  week  t>f  ^Daniel's  seventy,  and  the  time  of  preparation  of  the 
-earth  for  its  blessing,  as  the  preseijt  period  is  that  of  the  gathering  for 
heaven.     Tlw,b  brethren  '  are,  I  belieVe,  the  publishers^ofthis  gosjx^,, 
and  Jews.    Bul  all  thi.s  it  woirld  take  many  page:s  to'.-es|ablish  fro^ 
Scripture^  and  is  quite  unnecessarv  lo  the  arwument         '  '\  ''   '■'  '\\ 


-  m 


M:M 


L. 


m 


STATE. 


if  figure  being 
iiguage  never 
tent  with  the 


)  at  the  begin - 
;he  sheep  unci 
in  eitlier  c:we 
tile,  Christian 
I ;  anil  lastly, 
ed  both  from 
fclj'disputod." 

►  do  with  the 


is  been  niost 
veil  of  rays- 
in  cliaracter. 
ice  who  the 
estion  touch- 
ishment  into 
lainly  as  ca,n 
evil  and  his 
inished,  apd 
ibtful.*'  ',  .:^ 

lat  a  term  is 
kui>endous  an 
the  name  by 

fl  thus  have 

o  or  when  are  " 
"  <n'aiigeli7.pd 
ititorv.il  that, 
aiicl  tlieff  a}»,- 
yoars  at  least ,    - 
iratio!)  of'  tlio 
gatlierin;?  for 
»f  til  is  gosj)flJ(,, 
j^bJkli  i'rom 


;•"  EVBIti.AST W  X'uilSnMEJf T  "  ISf   MATT.  XXV. 


V  . 


36a 

come  into  commo/use  for  it,  without  offence  to  those  \\:ho 

•    claina  that  they  hold  eternal  punishment  as  much  as  we  do. 

If  the  term  is  itself  so  offensive,  it  surely  must  be  because  felt 

to  bo  in  opposition  really  to  their  views.     Why  uro-e  the 

^      "difficulties"  of  Ue  passage,  if  not  so  :^    But  beca^use  it 
gives  a  name  to  the  doctrine,  it  is  not,  therefore,  necessary 
to  the  doctrine,  wlvich  has  been  already  abundantly  provTd 
apa^t  from  this.,  '       .      -  ^  "  ' 

.  .  Mr.  Milton  next  comes  to  the  argument  as  to  "Everlast- 
ing," which,  although  in  fact  already  met,  we  shall  allow 
him  to  state  in  his  own  way  :—i 

7— -j'There  i^^rt  onde  the  first  cracrm  your  infallible  pro^ 
.        Everlastmg"'--he  adduces  "the  evedastinglxills,"  aj  Aaron's  " 
"everlu^ting  "  priesthood-"  '  everlasting  '  does  not  necessariiu 
mean  'endless.'    Why  are  you  so  sure  that  it  does  so  in  the  pas- 
sage before  us  ?    Your  answer  is  ready  :  because  the  same  word 

though  rendered  differently  in  our  translation,  is  in  the  same 
verse  applicd-to  the  hfe  of  the  righteous,  which  w^  know  to  be 

endless.     This  IS  without  doubt^the  Sebastopol  of  your  position. 

Ihous£^ds  of  persons  who  are  whoHy  unable  to  follow  ^mythin- 
,.hke  an  argument,  con  feel  the  full  force  of  tUs  fact.     When  they 

once  know  that  the  word  is  the  same  in  each  .clause  bf  the  sen- 
-  tcnce,  they  are,  perfectly  confident  that  it  must  bear  the  same 

meaning  in  each,        i  , 

"  But  why  ai;e  you  so  sure  that  it  meaws  endless  in  either  case  ?  .  ' 
.That  eternal  life  meafls  endless  Ufe  eLv.where  cannot  prove  it 
We  know  that  the  ^xpK^ion  is  ^ed  in  at  least  two  different- .' 
senses  namely,  as  a  present -possession,  and  as  an  object  of  hope  . 

,    .  .  .  ^Vhy  may  there^not  be  some  third  aspect  in'  which  *  eternal 
life    <m Represented,  differing  from,  however  closeiyconhetoted  ^ 

.  with,  the  o«ier  two  ?  "  -^^\.\' 

Mr.    Mintofi  surely  oonfbiUtias   thi%s  h^Fe^    A   i^incr 
may  besefin  in  many  aspects,  and  yfet  after^All  Ije  b^t  tk 
mme  Oi^xf    "Eternal'  life  i'  is  al#^s   "  eternj^  li#  ".  in 
whatever  aspe<5t  ^een,  as  ^  hou^  is  n«t  a  ^^^,  whethei^ s^en  "^ 
from  the  n<>rtl.orirom  the  south.    Tk«  th-rejs  no  #ai-i^t  ^   :; 
for  hir suggestion ^'v.,    '/.:  ::\:J^^':  ■":!'.:         ■'''^'    V  ' 

"  Now  hft^iit  b^<1oi^^s  ifecessary  to  m^pit^Miu  mp  precise  : 


\y 


^.-r. 


/  ■  ■' 


'■\-f. 


f 


1 


•»  .- 


364 


FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


'3'  ■: 


U- 


(J^ 


And  ha 
usag^.     It" 


ing  of  the  word  aionios,  rendered   *  eternal '   dr   '  everlasting. ' 
here  is  no  difSculty  either  in  its  etymology  or  its 
simply  the  adjective  of  tlie  word  (tion,  an  age  .<^ 
.eans,  therefore,  belonging  to,  gk  lusting  Uironghbliv/' 
eriodi    Wliat  that  i>eriod  is,  in  tiiiy  spocitietl  iustiinei', 
known  fronpi  the  nature  of  th<^  case,  from  the  context,** 
tert\l  evide^ice. "  ,  .| 


.^■^ 


/. 


3    m;;, 


^■!-^' 


Here  ^j^^JMinton"  imiores  the  later  use  oi  qion  for  ca- 
nity, which,  Ave  have  seen^  some  of  the  stqutest  advocator  of 
liQiited  periods  have  to*  admit,  and  makesj  the  matter  simple 
by  denying' all  thit  does  -not  eorisist  j  with  his'  theory/ 
^ionios  is  Clever  in  the  New  Testament, when  used  in  a 
time  sense,  less  than 'everlasting."  It  ihay  be  limited  by 
tlie  nature  of  what  it  qualiftes,  as  *' everlasting "'  itself  is ; 
hat  does  not  make  the  meaning  more  doubtful  in  the* 
one  csMse  than  in  the-pi-her;;  •    • 

« ' '  Sbmetkne^it  is  left  qi  iite  ihdefiuite^s  in ''  the  everlnsting  liills. ' 
IStanetypes  it 'is  uninistp.icably  precise,  as  in  *  bverjusting  consola- 
tion and  good  hppe  ; '  wliere  the  assuj-alice  is,  that  the  consolation 
plj^osided  will  U(pver'fail  us,  but  Avill  last  throughout  the  whole 
period  of  our  earfhly  life,  that  .is,  as  long  as  wtii-cquire  it.  ' 

Which  last  would  show  that  instead  of  b^ng  "  unmistak- 
ably precise  "  accordinj^  to  Mr.  Mintpn,  its.  meaning  has  in 
this  pase  to  be  determiaeii  by  coljaten'^l  evidehce,  and  is  not 
precise  at  all. "  The  ti-uth  is,  howeX'e|^  it  is  precise,  and 
instead  of  beiiigbounf  cd  by  a  UfeJtimei?tlio  consoling  thing, 
the  cohsalationj  lasts  fc  rever  in  th^j'striictest  sense.  If  the 
fiiture  state '  did"  nof  f  dfil  4t^;'"it"'  woul d  b€  truly '  bounded 
Jby*a  lifetime,  but  that  i«rould  m^ke  it  only  the  hypocrite's:' 
-liope  that  perishes,    J  Lnd.  so  i»  ,tbe.  next  Gxamjjle  he  pro- 


X       ".So"  ftlso  St.    Paul,  s£  js,  s*  I  will  eat  no  flesh  ipliile  ■ifieji;or0 
.s^aniS^/^  litellally'  '.to  "tlp^^  'age,'  ekejiljer^,  translated^ 'forever. ' 
" .  !T^^  is  the  ,^eriod-of  his  Own  life,, '^nd,  if  the.  saying 

s>  was  to  be-i:enidered  idiqftnti?tenl^p,  ft  slj'^ifild  havn  heen-  trfit) slated, 

:,'Xil»'lo»g:as'iri|ve:"^^^' ''■'''"'  ^'     "  "  '  "  '    ' 

.°  fl[  should  tliink  if  F'aul.atii  no'^gj^i^for^^^^t^^^^  period  of' 

"'hl^^'Tife,  he  w6ttl4  Mt'  the  argu- 


'i- 


"  "  "■  r  "■■'"■■«i 


■'"■# 

,-•'<',-: 

'm/ 

4                                         ■:     r-     ■  ^   i 

'.''',■■•'                           .    ■ 

«,. 

"EVEKLASTINO   PUNISUMENT"   lH    MATT.  XXV. 

3C5 

ment  is  but  a  plausibld  deception.     If  the  apostle  were  going 

to  eat  meat  in  eternity,  it  would  have  force.     Perhaps  Mr. 

,    Miaton  thinks  he  is,  but  lie  should  show  us  why  he  thinks  so. 

*  ,  «*  Tao  eiuostiou  tUercforo  stiiuds  tims  :  Is  there  any  aion,  ex- 
qept  An  endliffs  one,  to  which  tho  t'tcrnal  life  in  Matt.  xxv.  46, 
can  refer  ?,  Ami  if  so,  is  there  any  reason  to  believe  that  it  ioes  re- 

-  ter/tosueh  o(«m/  there  ?  Turn  to  Luke  xx.  35,  '  They  which  shaU  be 
"accounted  .worthy  to  obtain  that  world  {mon)  and  the  resurrection 
froni  the  dettdij^VYfH^and  I  believe  tliat  the  age  there  spofen  of 
is  the  milienmul  ii|fe ',;  .  then  why  might  not  the  obtaining  of 
the  blessedne4  C(kmi'eU-d  \viUi  that  age,  by  resurrection  in  the 
^  case  of  tlio  de^jd,  «rljy  change  in  the  case' of  the  living,  bg  called^ 
'fflonial  life,',i\hich  we  r-endijr  'eternal  Jife,'  deriving  our  word 
'eternal '  frorni  the  Latin  (rtas,  or  age  ?■    And  \vould  there  not  be 

•  a  peculiar  pr6]|)riety  in  this,  if,  at  th^e  same  time  that  those  who 
are  counted  wf^rtliy  enter .  ijjto  the  life  of  tlxat  age,  thte  members 
of  that  visible  i^harchy  then  living  on4he  earth,,  who  are -counted 
unworthy,  incur  destrnc Hon  from  the  pr^gence  of  the  Lord,  aod 
are"  gathered  in  Ijundles  to  be  burnt;?"      > 

Let  Mr; 'Miriton  prodiiw  a  passiage  in  which  ''aionial" 
means '' millennial ''plainly,  and  he  will  be  entitled  to  be 
listened  46.  This  he  cannot  do,  and  if  he"  could  he;  would, 
ve  may  be  mr^.  Even  then,  how  cai^r^  "  seonial  life  ' 
mean  sometimos  'Wwwl«Htlng,''  sometimes  *^  millenniar' 
life?  Again,  what  is  the  .mcjaaiiig  of  " millennial'?  life? 
It  cannot  be  life  simply  entered  into  at  the  millennium,  but 
life 'belortijinff  to  it.    'ifmsihe  believer's  life  belong  to  the 

^  millennium  ?  I/t  nOHntsr,  ir/irtfevcr.  It  is  not  the  "  life  of 
that  age  "  hito  which  boli.vers  enter;  xvhatever  speciaF  i-eiffu 
they  may  have  during  (hat  .time,  ^heir  life  belongs  to  eter- 
nity in  the  strictest  sense.  '  * ' 
-i  agree  with  Mr.  Minton  thai  the  judgment  here  spoken 
of  precedes  the  millenniiun,  ah«l  thftt  it  is  a  judgment  of  in- 
dividujtls.'  To  me  these  are  both  as  clear  as  need  be,  and 

.therefore!  noe([  hot  bring  forward   his  .proofs  for   theift. 

..The  argument  h'e  foimtk  on  this- if;  none  the  lrs<;  worthless. 


.  But  he  conjosuow  to  fhe  (puv^ioh"  in  a&'vMjr  to  the  post- 
millcnnialist,  Avho  hfi  thiiiks-will-  npi   be"  ^,5ved  ])y  his  pro- 


"^^ 


^ 


:'(. 


'If: 


il 
I 


-,  I 


t 


#. 


GO        J? ACTS  AND  THEOEIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUBE  STATE. 


phetic  expositions.     He  will  allow  "  eternal  "  to  mean  end- 
less, for  the  sake  of  argument. 

*  ■  ■     ■  '  ' 

*'  And  suppose  it  does,  how  much  nearer  would  the  passage  bo 
to  proving  the  doctrine  of  endless  luiiicry  ?     yot  fcjjnrtide." 

But  why  then  so  much  pains  to  prove  that  it  means  "  mil- 
lennial "  ?  Why,  the  prote.st  ULjainst  a  term  for  the  doctrine 
taken  from  so  "difficult  a  parable  "?  Is  Mr.  Minton  fight- 
ing for  the  sake  of  lighting,  to  show  us  his  power  as  a  com- 
batant, or  for  the  truth  'f  Why  contest  points  which  as 
far  as  the  doctrine  in  question  is  concerned,  have  "  not  a 
panicle  "^  of  importance  'i  — :-~~- jj_„    l  ^^ ^ .^_ 


"In  order  to  make  it  prove  that,  they  would  have  to  prove 
that  the  word  "eternal "  cannot  be  appUed  to  anything  which  is 
accomplished  onee  tor  all,  but  the  effects  of  which  are  eternal ; 
that  for  anything  'to  be  eternal,  it  must  be  in  eternal  process  of 
accomplishment.     This  is  your  assumption  througihout.     Otl^ers 
have  asserted  it  more  confideiitly.    But  what  then  are  Ve  to  make 
of   'eternal   judgment'?   .Will   God  be  etemaUy  judging  the 
wicked,  as  well  as  eternally  punishing  them  ?    Will  not  the  judg- 
ment take  place  once  for  all  ?   In  what  sense  can  it  be  called  eter- 
nal, except  that  its  effects  are  eternal — that  is,  if   the  Avord  be 
used  in  its  most  extended  meaning— iu  other  words,  that  it  will 
be  final  and  irreversible  ?    And  what  are  we  to  make  of  the  *  eter- 
nal redemption,'  wliieh  Christ  is  spoken  of  i^  '  harittg  (Brought out 
for  us '  ?    It  is  distinctly  declared  to  have  been  accomplished 
once  for  all :  it  will  not  ba  a  continual  process  lasting,  through 
eteriiity.     It  is  called  eternal,  because  its  effects  will  be  eternal; 
And  why  shoidd  not  punishment  be  called  eternal  on  the  same 
principle  ?    If  eternal  judgment  is  not  eternal  judging,  nor  eter- 
nal redemption  eternal  redeeming,  why  should  eteriial  punish- 
ment be  eternal  punishing  "  ? 

Nowthe  words  are,  "  these  shall' go  away  into  everlasting 
punishment,"  and  this  is  explamed  to  be  "  everlasting  fire, 
prepared  for  the  devil  and  his  angels."  It  is  -singular  how 
the  force  of  these  expressions  is  felt,  almost  admitted^ 
and  then  denied.  First,  the  complaint  is,  that  a  phrase  ir 
taken  out  of  a  most  difficult  parable ;  then  everlasting  is  not 
everlasting  but  millennial ;  then  if  it  is  everlasting  it  is  per- 


^^ 


"  EVERLA.STIXO  PtfxiSHMEXT"   IX   MATT.  XXV.     ,367 

fectly  corrett  annihilation  doctrine :  the  efcct  of  thq  pun- 
ishment is  eternal,  and  punishment  is  not   "  punishi^i^/." 
Now  even  as  to  the  last  it  is  really  the  litei^al  force  of  the 
word,*  which,  moreover,  always  implies  suffering  in  some 
form.     Fine,  imprisonment,  death  are  that,  and  the  passage 
in  the  first  epistle  of  John,  already  quoted,  cannot  be  ren- 
dered otherwise  than  by  some  wordnear  akin  to  "torment.? 
It  is  not  a  word  that  will  possibly  allow  the  thought  of  the 
sufferer  passing  away  from  under  it,  while  yet  it  endureso 
The  punishment  cannot  continue  when  there  is  no  Ion f^er  a 
-person  to  be  punished,     Annihilation  cannot  be  etarnal  pun- 
ishment.    This  4*  whyMr^Minton  is  so  anxious  to  have  it 
"  millennial,"  as  we  hav-e  seen.     He  is  uneasy  under  the  very 
idea  of  its  being  eternal.     Why  will  we  call  it'  so,  qiioting 
the  words  of  a  very  difficult  parable  V    Then  he  tgj|is  round 
and  says,  let  it  be  eternal,  it  is  alt  right,  and  wel^believe 
in  it  alike.     It  must  be  seriously  doubted  if  we  (^: 

But  "eternal  redemption  "  is  not  an  eternal  process,  and 
♦'  eternal  judgment  "  is  not ;  why  should  eternal  punishmerit 
be  ?  As,  for  eternal  judgment,  of  course  '  ",  sentence " 
{kpina)  is  not  always  being  passed;  but  the*J)erson  is 
always  under  it,  or  it  would  not  be  eternal.  Anif  similarly 
as  to  redemption,  the  person  is  always'  enjoying  it.  If  the 
punishment  then  be  inflicted  suffering  (and  that  is  the  very 
idea  of  punishment),  the  person  cannot  ce^se  to  llPs,nd  the 
■  suffering  go  on.  Let  Mn  Minton  find,  the  passage  iftVhich, 
K6Xa6tz  does  not  imply  suffering  of  some  sort,  and  then  he. 
will  have  some  argument ;  but  then  it  will  be  easy  to  prove 
that  every  beast  that  dies  (and  multitud^|^j^n  severest 
pain)  suffers  eternal  punishment  as, cV/^/y  as^BE-  And  he 
cainnot  deny  it.  A  beasj-'s  loss  may  be,  of  ^^|lfcas  much 
less  than  a  man's  as  a  man  is  "more  tha^  a  beg^t.*^^ut  eter- 
nal punishment  is  as  real  in  the  one  castas  it^he^^fc 

It  will  not  do  then  to  talk,  as  Mr.  Minton  dS^F  the 
efect  being  e||Tiab     The  ejf^eet  and  what  produces  th^ifect, 
are  very   dilRrent  things.     In  '^eternal _redemption "  the 
:— ■ ;^    *  /raA/rfi?Sjint  MoXddna. — ■. — — 


j^^  -a-  55^  -;  sr 


!  ■  I  ''^-l 


11 

If 

1 

I' 9-' ' 

1  ■ 

J-'F 


3Cft         FACTS  AND  TIIEQJIIKS  AS  TO  A  PUTUHK  STATfi.  y 

redeuined  are  not  merely,  eternally  enjoying  the  Wesseilnest, 
into  whii'h  they  are  brought  as  the  etteet  otre.U'nij)tl<»n,  Otif 
thii  retlemptinn  also  i/.srf/.  An<l  thl.s  is^  if  you  like;  to  Hiiy  so, 
one  of  the- etiects  ;  jmt  the  retlcniption  itself  is  jiossessed  an<l 
enjoyed  foreyer.  It  is  in  vain  to  plead  that  the  punishment 
is  e^jdured  fon^vcT,  wlien  there  is  no  longer  any  I /eing  toen^l 
dure  it. 

As  to  the  "  everlasting  lire,"  Mr.  Minton  as  usual  refers 
to  Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  but  adds  nothing  fresh  to  the 
argument. 

; ''  everlasting  fire  "  is,  and  what 
the  mere  lengthenin<jc  unneees- 
racted  argument  to  take  this  uj) 
'consider  some  things  connected 
with  this  doctrine  in  Scripture,  and  it  is  time  to  turn  to 
these. 


We  have.tieen  \vh 
its  effect.     It  woul 
sarily  of  a  sufficient 
again.     We  have  still 


CHAPTER  XXXVfl. 

"the    CJOSI'i;L    OF    IIOPK." 


i'' 


Our  aceountSs  with  annihilationism  are  well-nigh  closed. 
But  there  remain  still  some  from  the  opposlt^'e  side  of 
restoratioriism  which  require  to  be  looked  at,  and  amontr 
the  advocates  of  this,  spite  of  his  protest,  wc  must  reckon 
Dr.  Farrar,  He  is- not  indeed  an  assured  Universalist ;  but 
it  is  not  wronging  him  to  say  that  he  is  one  in  hope.  His 
bodk  is  styled  '' PZtornal  //'y>.  ,'>" and  his  own  vieAvs  are  cvi- 
denVy  identical  with  what  h(|l  calls,  "the  gospel  of  hoj^^i": 
^here  by  "  hope,"  he  does  not  mean  certainty,  not  a  '-hope 
which  maketh  m)t  ashamed,"  .but  at  leasts  liope  that'nutr/. 
His  utterances  are /laturally  somewhat  inconsistent  and  con- 
tradictory in  conifcquence.  But  we  will  .credit  him  with 
the  somewhat  incipendent  ground  he  takes,  and  reserying 
thedoctrine  of  th[?  a';ru>(tt/ttVa(^/^-,  the  "restitution  oV  ail 


.^.^.„ 


n 


tUIi.  Upsi'KL   OF   UOPK." 


'  IH,  and  what 


|8   coniiectcMl 
10  to  turn  to 


i,  wu 
own 


things,"  as  Htatod  in  Scripture,  for  future  ca 
will  now  look  at  his  powit ion-,  which  avc  will  8tato 
Avoids. 

"On  «udi   a  .lucstiou   us  tliis,"  ho  suys,'^  ''I  caru  hut  little 
|or  individufd  authority,  but  this  mueh  at  h>ast  i.s  provod  by  the 
many  diff.^ring  tlu-ories  of  wise  and  holy  inen-that   God   has 
given  us  no  clear  and  decisive  revolution  on  th#  final  condition 
of  those  AVho  have  dic.l  in  sin.     It  is  ruveaU'd  to  Us  tliat  «  God  is 
love  ' ;    and  that  •  ftim  to  kn.»w  is  life  feternal.' ;  anrl  that  '  it  is 
,    not  His  will  that  any  should  porisli ' ;  and  that  '  as  in  Adam  all 
dio,  even  so  in  ^Christ  shall  all  bo  Imrtde  alive  ' ;  but  how  long 
even  after  doath,  man  may  continue  to  resist  His  will -—how 
long  he  may  continue  in  that  ^nritual  death,  which  is  alienation 
Irom  God  ;-that  is  on(.  of  the  s(.eret  things  which  God  hath  not 
revealed.     But  this  much  at  any  rate,  that  the  fate  of  man  is  not 
-finally  and  irreversibly  sealed  at- death,  you  yourselves, -un wit- 
tnigly  pei^mps,  but  none  the  k^  certainly,  admit  and  decline 
and  confess,  every  time  you  r.>peat  in  the  Apqstles'  (!reed,  that 
Christ  descended  into  hell.     For  the  sole  passage  which  proves 
that  article  of  the  creed  is  the  j.assage  in  St.  Peter  which  tells  lis 
-  that  '  He  Avent  and  preached  to  the  sphits  in  prison,  which  some- 
time were  disobedient. '     St.  Peter  in  my  text  tells  you  in  so  many 
words,  that  <  the  gospel  was  preached  to  them  that  were  dead  ' 
and  It,  ns  the  church  in  every  age  has  held,  the  fate  of  those  dead 
sinnei-s  was  not  irrevocably  fixed  by  death,  then  it  must  be  cleai- 
and  obvious  to  the  meanest  understanding  that  neither  of  neces- 
sity is  ours, 

"Tliere  then  is  the  solo  answer  whicji  I  can  give  to  your  ques- 

tio,n,   '  what  nbout   the   lost?'     My   belief  is  fixed  upon   that 

living  God,   who,  we  are  told,  is  '  the  Saviour  of  all  men.'  *  Mv 

answer  is  with  Thomas  Erskine  of  Linlathen.  that  '  we  are  lost  ' 

he^e  as  much  as  there,  and  that  Christ  came  to  seek  and  save  the 

ost ;    and  my  hope  is  that  tlie  vast  majority  at  any  rate  of  the 

ost  may  at  length  ho/ound.     If  any  hardened  sinner,  shamefully 

loxmg  Ins  sin,  aiid  despising  the  long-sufibring  of  his  Saviour, 

J^  with  that  doctrine,  it  is  at  his  own  just  and  awful  peril. 

^P^if  on  the  other  hand,  there  be  some  among  you,— as  are 
there  not  ?-souls  sinful  indeed  but  not  hard  in  sin  ;-souls  fail- 
mg  indeed,  yc-t  even  amid  their  failing,  who  h)n<..  my] 


*  Eternal  Hope,  j).  S6,  ofc. 


pray,  and 


■U^  ; 


■.:..»■■■■'■;  ■  /"y^^' ' ■  %i-^^"''  ■.■:■:..-::      .  :"•  y:-^'y^"-'^/Wm.  ^'--/.r^'^^^-j  ^^.';'''^''-f.-y''''r  :-y  ■'!■'■■■' ^ ■-:':/ 

,:^y        ■^,-;;^;; '-■'        .:  ^,:-:^\  •       '■.■■••■  t     -&,,_!  -■  '■'■'"^   ■    ■■  Vv' :f '''' '"' '^''■'■'•'    ,'■'■■ 'W  ■  4/i';' /•■     '■'  ■■.'■":.  ■-V.i /■■-■/  ■'-■■'«'/.,',.-'   V^  ,i$.''  '. 

.,■::-■■■■■. '-yjy      '.>--■■   '"',-■■■  -'^ ■■'-"'■■"'    ■'.'•"    '■■7 /-.:'"•■  V.  •■'''Y^-'"-^'^-'^               '■■^■■■'■'       ''■■   ■  ■■ 

^■''■'■---    -  •.;•■<-''       ;--'^-.  -•:---.'----...''^'    ■       ■  !__-•■  "-'^'h  ■■■  '■■■'  ■■■■'  ■ .'  '  ■       "i  ■  .  v^  ■.••.-■■■■":•■■. - 

■.^:  ■;'- „:■  ■■   :   .  ^    ■  .   ■■•^■■■"-"^-       .      .  -^  ■.::---^--n-.-     ■■•  '       ^   ,  :.M- ,..''-\y  ■/,.-■"■, 

■\                           -.-si'      .'.'  .        -.<-...      .                            ..."   -,-'                ■       ■              .      •                ■■                 ■             -                                ■//■        ■         '■-■'■■■-:■     -■'•--.        ■!•'        ■'•■-■.            ■■     •       '-''m--'-       .-■ 

^...v>^.  ^,;:--,-    -'.^/v  ■  •  ^^■:-, '■-'•■ -..';-.  ^      v.''^,v -:■■■/"::  ..;.:/V/.-Vv.?  ■•■.:;.?'^^^:  •     ^■.■■.■■' ■•"'■:  :ff^:';,^:- 

^*--    -■     ■  *" '-  .  ■     '             '-'"                   :'' ' '                  -if"                 *    ■'■':    .-■■'•,■■'■'/-■,•■;■■■.';■    / '  „■'    '■',■.■-/  .'-/•-■  '    -    '.     :  '^  ■  ■            -y- "'■'■!,-■■  ^  <''^  •■'■ 

.-„*^-:-:r.  •                                                                                                      *.,-',,.                                                       *'.               ■-■'...■■,-.■                       ./                ■■.'>.-             -•■         ■                                           ./■„,« 

e-:.-       ■.    ^   ■  ■.    --    ■•■.       ■    ■■■     ■.,-■■.■•     ..■:    ■-:.-.:■  r-,::-.    -■:.--..^_::::-y-yryi.--,  ■■■■.-■    \      ■■■•  ■    ■•,.,■.,,>■.■.; 

^>:                                '       -                                                                                        ■       ■                   -*                                                                     ■■                             ■:              ,            .                      ■-     ;  '            '        ■    ."                         '                    '                                 ■-••».                 ■.            .,.; 

s'.::.'   ':■:.- --y       ■         -■■---:'■     .    y^::-^--':r-r  :-    '-W-l.^:---\' ■■-'--  '■-:'y:r-^^-:. 

^" -:       ■'   ..'..■■:"        -■    '■           -.     ->.'■           vvv    •■     '.    .   •-  •.   ■,':-:V--.   ■■-■:/-     ■.-..    .  •^.-  :    •;/■'.    -.     '■.■■:     -.            :   .   ■:.,■■., 

'  .■    .              '- '                   .-           ■',■■■        ■..■■■.■                   ■•'■•;'"             .  ;•     '■      •       ••       .■  ■'               :.:-■.•           .   •,  ■  .        ■.':      >■-     . 

....        ■                  -ii-      .--               ■         ..       '-■'■•      ■       ■     ■■          .                .■             ■                         -.             .•           ■          -       -.:'-■'                 ■         .;.,            .                                              '•       •    '     ..       .      ■              ■        .■■     ......                                                  .,                         «..■      ■ 

■    ;■;■        r- ■'■     --0-:     :.■■;;■"   .     .             "'                -^-'^■'■-■^\_-       :  fy '  ■   -.      ■      -t    ,  .-.     7  ■       - ,.   ■■.-■■:-'-        ■■  ■  .  •    '  •■,  ,  ■     .-..■ 

;,,*^:'"                                                         ';",.'     •!■     ■■■,                ,J--:        ,                                           -'■  :               .'■■■    »       ■■•/■       ■                  -          .      *       "■.■')■             '■      '.'                  ^■'  -    '-     '  '  '    '■                --■*         '■.' 

fe^^r^.  :  .:--'::,i::-f-^  ■     .-.-^v""'-  ..  ■".■.    .     .-■..-.v  ■:- .   ..   •   ,:-      ,    - -'  -  \    ■      ■...•■.■;■.:.■  .,.■-:  '■■-,:    ■:    ■' 

rri';    ^     -^-  .    ■■  \.:'.            ■■     :•■-.,    ■   0  .•            -  ■■    ^    ■.■■;.;^^.                   •■.     -■•                             .'A    >     -          ■        -        '          ..■-.■■       •-■■.      v  ■■■'■. 

-..-^-    •^-.'  ^v;:,V::r;.rt---fr.:   \:,  ■;.;  ,:;V  ^^..■■:.\,:.:.-::--^^"  :, 

^■^  ■  v"--v-    .^■.■■-    :"■--■■:■"■  .:s-,  .:-.■■;  .-•    ■         -.^              •■ -■     ^  '■  v    '■■---:■  \ -■■■■■-■■  ■':      ...?■• 

'-■.  ■         "■.■■■'         -    '--!'.                               ■  '           '--r-'v'   -            .■■      "     ^,.             .  -^, "    .  ■      "  ■             .  ■    .           ,               '                                    '                                        .,..--.'■              -     ."      ■                 >         ■  .     ■  , 

;                                                                          -,-.■;,  .-                                        .  ■      '3-        -■."  .  '                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             J                                                                                                                 ,*••■. 

::.:.■■■■            \m^^::--  /  ,;^y:-.-      :  :.    ^    ■  -     ■     //    '       ■:  "  .-y-.                      ^                         ■■....■>.  ^-        ;  ,:           .    ■■ 

■    .:                      ns-C-ri^-i'---'.--  .  .■■-.'  f''t."'-i  -         ■'"••-       .     V       "    ■        .•                      ;....■                                                                                                   ■.',..                      .          . 

.•■■.     .   ■■..■■            -'-^^c-} ---^  -   ■'       .  '-b"  -       ■   ■•■■   .     y-».-    -  '  ■■                     .--.      ■-      »     .                           -        .                     '        .      ■      .     ■                   .  .     .   ■   .       t 

'■• :     ■               ■     ■■        ■     .-■■:     ■  "V---                  --■■•■•■-;                -^'           '■'.■.■                                                                         ......■.•.■■.. 

■:'./\^    ■-..         ■     ■-■-      --   .--"-:••         ..e-,  -:.-.-v;-     -    '.,,-  •.  -.■                ;.         •    ,                                         ■  .:.     ■..■       -,,,...       , 

,      ..     .        .                                :■:           ■■---■    -'..        -n.      -.         :..  -■■..■■■..                                                                                            ,           ■.■..... 

•  ■         ■•■■-    ■■--..         V.  v.^v                   ■              .    ■       ■  ■ 

....    :.;..                          .-                                     „....-.      -   ,.   »:;-S--       ■                                                                           ■■.     -'-r-             -                                  ■       ■                                    .                                                                                        ■-,--• 

..*    ^     .            ■                     ..-■'^    ....                 .        .       .       -,    .....,-";                                       '.  ■   .-■                                                                 ^                                                          ..--.....- 

.     ■    ■                                         ■  ■          ■     '                 '■■-■■-.'           '    y:  '■          -i'-      "■■■■-'.                        -..-■•                    '                                                                          ».''■-•               '                     ■                        ■■■.''.             ;    . 

.■.".'             .               .                             ■■■                -    .■",                               .                               '"".. 

^^. 

^^^^^ 

W-'  -     -,.           ■             ■        '■"      ■■                   ■'■       ■■      •    '       '.      '            ■■■■'"-       •■    ..      ■"'    ■            ■       -               •■'•:-:■■.:.    -'■     :                ' 

^^^^^^-- 

■         -.'                                       .       --■■                                   ■-■                             ■.       .     ■                     ■    .,-■  ■-                      ■■      -■-     .                                                            . 

^^^^H^^ 

■  .'■'  -  -  ■■■     .   ■                            .       :/                          .              .-?-.   ,  ':.-■    -'  '■ 

.  .■      -          -.-■.      ■         ..■   .".    ,'      ■   .■                          V  .  ..    '     . 

^^^^^^^^ 

-•     .    ■■    ■  ;■■-        -.■■.•■■    ■..  -      -:'>fiy  -    -    '  ,  ■■..'■  .     --           .:'■..  .:.    , 

^^^^^^^' 

^^^^^^11^^ 

^''':^-'y--) 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^': ''':':-■ 

u  ■■■■A.-- 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  '- 

yi                    ■            •    .      - 

n   -     ■  "  .,;      ■ .  ' 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ '  ■ ' 

^^^^^^^ 

■  --yr':  '^  ^''' ■•■-- ^ -■'■':■  "^:^:-';:'.^  \' ^: •"■■.■'-' ^^■•■:-;    ■■:\:  -  -^X-.v' 

^^^^^^^^^^^r 

.■■    ..-,,■   /,;■:/.■■'"  ...■■  ::>'■['■    ..;.: ..-.-■.•;  ■ '  :  - ■  ■■  -'-'■•,:.■■.■ 

^^  ' 

.,      .■      ■      ^-                    '"■-^-            "■■"■     -f        '^-   ■"■,"■''-=■   ■■                              :-."'.,.■,■.;     ^'     "              ■■■■■■■■.■■■.■■.               .      -       P^ 

t                         ■       _            ■■          ■       ■  .i-'              ;.■■".:"■•■■                                                        -..-■,'■-                                                                                                                                '■-.■■ 

■-  •■   "  ■-.    ■  ■  ■'■,'.■  .    >--:    -     -    y'    :-'^'.:.  .   .  ■■     ■....■'.'■.•■'•    •  ■   •'■.  ■       •■""\    .■  ■    "        ■  .•   -■      "'  .;'■■ 

'  '.                       ■'.,.'■                                         •       .  ■                                 .       ■  -       ■  ■                                                     ;    , ■       ■                   „.               -       '-.■•■ 

.'.■■■                 .'■".■    ■■  '              "•           .•»■.'                        ■■."'■.■■■■'"                                                   .■■.'■-■'"''■.■ 

■■.■■■'■    ■       '                 ' -'-■     ■'  ''    •    .     :    ■      ■■■■'■,'.         ■    ■■       '■'.--■■           ■■;.■-.            .     ■■.'■:-■■.■         ■'     ■..    ■,.       ■           '■■      .    -.^/v-.- 

.  A-  .  ■.-    ■               ..                           ..                       ■  ..     ■'■       ■.     -  •                        ■■     :  ;  ■              ■■    ■   ■.               ..  .  •■  ■     ■■  y  ■ 

i\     ■              ..•^-      ■  .        ■                   ■  :-  ■..        ■      :  ..     ,     '^                      ■           ■..■            ■■•■■:  ^  ■■    ■■■ 

y    \          1       .■       -  '■                          •.    .:■■   ■                  ■■^-  ■       '              •:   ■  "'■                .       • 

■          .             ..■.■■'                            ■.'...»                                     0     '■■     '■-■■.'■,                ■■      ■"        '■     '    ■.                r  .    >.    ■         ;   •             ■..■■■'.-    .■■■         ;  ^ 

-•'■        .'.  ';"'..    ■■.\-     ■■'."".■     ■■:'■.--    ■  't  i.  -   '      ■       .'. .    '             '.      '  -.     .             .■■■■  ■■     '   ■■■''    "   ■■  '  ■    ■'..'■        '  ■  ■,  .■ 

...     ■■■..'      ■'.'-■..     ..■■.'             f .  ■         "     .                         *■■..'".                                  '  ■ '                .".",. 

.■.  ■     •\  "    '^z      ■  ■    ■  •                     ■    .  ■        ■'■":■       y   ■■'      '^    ' y  -.-'■'  \    y     ■-   :  ■  '     ■    ; .  .'                                :'■'"-,  J \ , 

'...■■-             r ^^.                     •     .          .      .                "..;...■                                     ....-,■,■■.                                 .         .   .'                                                     '»■-                                    .     .         .         '      . -                                ■              •               .■■■.-                                                     ■..     .                           V                           ,....;,■               .■■!■. 

■■;.               •■■-■    .•■^..  -     .   ■  -'                      -  y.    .    ■  r,   ■■■.-:    -          ■■.■.-.-■       :  -  ■:                       ■'  >  .■  ■■-      ■- 
-■^■.-  .  '    ■   .       ■                 -       -            ■    '    .  •                 '  .    .                                             :  '     :      ■               y  y     ^r  -  '.    .'    - 

■  - '                         . »  1     V                                                                                             -    y       ■    ,  - .  "              ■      .  •  ■                 r      ■  ■       -    ,.          .-'■■'■■■■ 

.■•■'■■■■                                        :■  ■-.  ■..'               '  :■    ■     .'y      --":■"-'.    -,    ■                   ■             :-'  .     :■''■  /■              ...  ■■  ■/^■■/:-- 

'                                                                                                                                                                         .  ■» 

'^-'  --    ■■■:..       A-   .■.    '■■            ■....-  :■..   ■  ■..         ■■       ■■..-■         .     ■  .     .-  ■              .  .     .      .    ...           :         .:         y  ;..■..- 

v^. /-.._...  ■          .-'■;■■■■          .■■:■.     -     ■  ■■         ■■'.             y.-  ^ :   ■■    -'.K---.--  ■■   y,  _y-y-    ■     ,'•    .      ::  ■: 

-  -'  y  ■■':■''  ■            ■'.,_'.('.'':                                                             ■                    ."   ■       '"■,'.-'■■            ^■'  "               ■■■              ■.-■■:■'-'       ■ ,' ..    ■■■';!■ 

X).^-:                      :'^--'-    '         ."  ■■      ■■■•■    '•;■    ''     •        -^    .'.          ■■    .      .■■    ..    .••■:    ■                                     ■     "}-.--■        V  -:           "    ':   ■■    ''■.-.''.■     .'               .      .       '■      y 

■",          ■                               •                           -             .                   .               '             ■       .                                             .                                                                                       .          ■>                     .          .■         '                          ,,■."■                   ■                                                                                                  .■'..■•".                .•..■■■.■''•"■ 

■    '■"''■■""      ' '       "'■'  ■                    ■                       •   ■  -."                 -^     "           :'■■             ' .        ■■'.'              .  .  ■  ■     ''■'.'.■'■:      ''    ■"'     ■   ■    ■       .    :  •    ■     ■-.,■""■-■■-■   i■^,;'-■^v■.  ■■■.■■■■■      ■■"■'■:;■* 

•■  "  .     1                                                                                                                                                                                   ..  ■   '■              ..■."■■.-                   ■■-.-•                   .      k                 t 

•  ■.■.'■■■               0  ■  ,'■                  .;■..■■        -      .  '■  y:     ..      ■    ■    '  r.'''  -              ':  ■ "  ■  -.    ;     "."•,-..  ■■.-■  .•  ■    ■.      '    ..■■..■■■..  v.  ■.-.■  ...    : 

..;■;.  ;.■  ■•     ./    ■•■  ■          ■  :■  ■'         y       "■'.      ..    .■  '  yy^-  '  -       ■  ■  .;      .  ■             -  ^  v  -.     ■.-  ^    ■     \      ■.,■       ..   ■..■  .    ■    -    ^ 

O  ^  '"'^  ^ 


d 


AsMclMton  for  Infttrmatton  and  liiui««  M«iiM«m«ii« 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring,  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


'< 
^ 


/. 


o 


y. 


<5> 


V^ 


'■i     « 


,*     ir. 


Centimeter 


Hllllllllllllllllllllll 


m 


Inches 


2        3-       4         5        6         7        8        9        10       11,      12       13       14       15   mm 

llMllllllllllllllMlllllllllllllllllirillllllllMllMlLlllMllllllllMllllllllrilllllllllllllllllllllllllltlll 


1 


'ifi'i''i'i''l'W'i''i'fi''i'i'i'l''i'i''i'n''i''i''i'^^ 


1.0 


1.1 


3  4 


itt 

bi 


12.8 


132 


136 


L25  Jlll.4 


m 


*fl 


% 


vc 


(Pp 


MPNUFfiCTURED  TO  RIIM  STRNDRRDS 
BY  APPLIED  IMAGE,  INC. 


•>>^ 

<«!» 


/. 


& 


-/ 


■'V 


f' 


T1 


>)>> 


\ 


,^ 


^ 


370 


FACTS  AND  TUEOUIKS  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


^ 


love,  and  agonize,  and  strive  to  creep  ever  nearer  to  the  light ; — 
then  I  say,  have  faith  in  God.  There  is  lu)])o  for  yon  ;-^hopc', 
even  if  death  overtake  you  before  fft'e  final  victory  is  won  ;— 
hope  for  the  i^oor  in  spirit,  for  theirs  in  the  kingdom  of  hoavon  : 
hope  for  th^  mourners,  for  they.Bhull  be  com fortcd— though  you 
too  may  have  to  be  i^urified  in^at  Gehenna  of  reouiah  fire  V)eyon»l 
ihe  grave." 

"  We  are  wretched  ;  therefore — ^not  surely  in  this  shoii;  world 
only,  but  forever — God  will  pity  us.  Punish  us  ?  Yes,  punish 
us,  because  He  pities.  But  '  God  judges  that  He  may  teach,  Ho 
never  teaches  that  He  may  judge.'  Hi.'i  jeonian  fire  is  the  firo 
of  love  ;  it  is  to  purify,  ngt  to  torture  ;  it  is  to  melt,  and  not  to 
burn.."*.  -        '  ■     ■  .  ■■i>,-  ■       —  ■  .      ■■.■;-...-■-■ 

This  ifl^Dr.  Farrar's  "hope."  And  if  it  were  confined  to 
himself,  one  might  afFord  to  pass  it  by,  but  it  is  a  hope  that 
suits  men  well,  and  that  they  are  drinking  in, — a  hope  that 
is  not  the  true  hope  for  those  "poor  in  spirit"  whom  he 
addresses,  and  for  whom  God-  has  far  sweeter  Comfort  ;■  but 
a  hope  that  just  those  triflers  with  a  Saviour's  nlercy  of 
whom  he  speaks  will  take  to  hang  theinselves  over  that 
awful  abyss  of  hell,  till  they  prove  it,  not  the  fire  of  love,  but 
the  awful  and  eternal  fire  of  wrath,  which  answers  to  the  un- 
dying worm  within. 

First  then,  as  to  these  "  poor  in  spirit " — souls  lon^ng, 
praying,  agonizing,  striving  ever  to  creep  nearer  to  the 
light — is  God's  answer  to  your  longing  this,  that  after  all 
the  fire  of  Gehenna  may  be  ne'eded  to  purify  you  ?  No,  it 
is  the  new^  of  a  better  purification:  "the  blood  of  Jesfls 
Christ  His  Son  cleans^th  from  all  sin."  What  saved  a 
dying  thief  at  the  last  hour,  can  save  still  without  the  need 
of  "  ajonian  fire."  Dr.  Farrar's  "  gospel  of  hope  "  mis-states 
the  whole  case*  as  to  man's  condition,  but  worse  it  sliofhts 
Christ's  l>lessed  work,  and  substitutes  penal  fire  for  atone- 
ment,— wrath  for  grace. 

Is  man  willing  to  have  God's  salvation,  and  God  lacking 
in  will  or  in  power  to  save  him  ?    Never,  surely. f     "  Who- 

*  Eternal  Hope,  p.  97. 

t  I  tako  tins  opjiortnnity  of  noticing  briefly  Mrs  Cox's  arrrnnient  in 


,4:fcH 


**THE   GOSPBL  ^JP  HOPE." 


arjiiinipnt  in 


N371 

soever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of -the  Lord  shall  be  saved." 

'  Is  salvation  a  doubtful,  laborious  process,  arrived  at  by  Ion" 

effort,  by  prayers,  by  strivings,  which  may  have  to  be  eked 

this  connection,  wliich  is  the  starting-point  of  Iiisbook.    He  asks,  if  Tyro 
and  Siclon  would  liave  repented  in  view  of  Christ's  mighty  works,  why 
were  lliey  not  permitted  to  witness  them  ?     "  Can  we  blame  them',  will 
God  condemn  them,  and  condemn  tiiem  to  an  eternal  death,  or  an  eternal 
misery,  because   tliey  did   not  see  what   they  could   not  see  2  "    "It 
seems  hard  and  unjust, that  a  man's  salvation,  a  man's  life, should  hang 
'on  the  age  into  which  he  is  boTn."    "And  yet  who  dare  say  of  any 
class  of  men,  in  any  age,  that  nothing  but  their  own  will  prevented  their 
salvation  1  .  .  .  No ;  to  say,  •'Dou!)tless  God  gave  these  poor  men  all 
that  was  necessary  to  life  and  virtue  .  .  is  simply  to  offer  Him  that  in- 
sincere flattery,  to  sliow  Him  that  respect  of  persons,  which  even  Job 
could  see  Ho  Himself  would  be  the  first  to  rebuke.""    Thus  Mr.  Cox 
can  "see  no  way  out  of  the  difficulty,  so  long  as  we  assume  what  the 
Bible  does  not  teach,  that  there  is  .no  probation  beyond  the  grave." 
He  has  no  doubt  that  the  men  of  Sodom  and  Tyre  have  heard  Christ's 
words  loiig  ere  this,  and  that  the  words,  "  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for 
ihem  in  the  day  of  judgment  imply  this  " !    (SaJvator  xMimdi,  ch.  i.). 
f.  Now  we  are  among  the  people  of  "  brain  so  narrow  "  as  J^rbelieve 
the  Lord's  words  imply  the  very  opposite  of  this.     They  cer||Wy  show 
thax^  issue  of 'the  day  of  judgment  depends   upon .  tJie  present 
respons^iven  by  man  to  God,  and  not  upon  a  supposed  future  one  ; 
for  if  it  depended  upon^the  future,  it  coukUnot  be  decided  note  that  it 
would  b«  "  more  tolerable  "  ;  especially  as  nobody  has  a  fair  chancV; 
now !    But  then,  if  man's  wilMs  not  the  obstacle,  what  are  we  to  think  ' 
of  our  Lord's,  "  how  often  would  I.  and  ye  would  not,"  or  "  ye  wUl  not 
ccme  unto  me,"  etc. 

Doubtless  Tyre  and  Sidon  will  not  be  condemned  for  not  seeing  what 
they  could  not  see  :  no  one  believes  they  will.  But  they  are  responsi- 
ble  for  the  light  they  Hkd,  and  there  is  a  "  more  tolerable  "  judgment,— 
"  few  stripes  "  instead  of  "  many." 

Again,^'  Nineveh  repented  at  the  preaching  of  Jonas,' 'an  illustration 
of  what  the  Xord  means  in  this  very  connection.  Was  that  "  repentance 
unto  life  "  1  The  city  remained  in  consequence,  was  not-  overthrown  ; 
Capernaum,  not  repenting,  was.  The  comparison  shows  that  the  Lord 
does  not  affirm  that  Tyre  and  Sidon  could  have  been  so  brought  to  God 
and  saved,  but  that  aUeast  they  would  have  been  affected  and  humbled, 
like  Nineveh,  by  a  virion  which  the  cities  of  Israel, were  callous 
and  indifferent  to.  With  this  sensfe  there  is  no  "  difficulty  "  to  get  out 
ofby  anunwarrantablp  and  nnM>nptural  supposition. 


,^^- 


V 


s.'^aHa^An.  -.  i    .^-%       "'sxes'  ^  ■'. 


372         FACTS  AND  TnEORIKS  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


*; 


r  / 


out  after  doath  by  some  supplementary  process  ?  Nay,  but 
being  "  justified  by  faith.,  we  have  peace  with  God  throuLjh 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  "justified  through  the  faith  of 
Christ,  and  not  by  the  works  of  the  law."  Is  hell-fire  God's 
process  of  salvation  for  those  who  look  to  Ilim,  or  God's 
wrath  upon  ihose  who  reject  His  salvation  ?  It  is  the  latter, 
and  DOt  the  former.  I)id  Christ  tell  the  "  poor  in  spirit" 
that  theirs  was  the  lake  of  fire  or  "  the  kingdom  of  heaven  "  ? 
Did  He  tell  the  mourners  they  should  be  "  comforted"  or 
tormented ';:'  .    /< 

Dr.  Farrar's  gospel  is  really  iHfidelity  as  to  fundamental 
truth — as  to- Christ  and  grace.  It  makes  Jheir  hearts  sad 
whom  .God  has  not  made  sad,  While  those  only  could  find 
encouragement  in  it  who'  are  as  ignorant  of  grace  as  he  is,  or 
else  those  wh^  want  comfort  to  go  on  in  sin  as  Ipng  as  they 
can.  The  apostle  asks,  •"  how  shall^iye  escapdlBj^e  neglect 
so  ,great  salvation  ?"  Dr.  Farrar  ansVvers,  tlflf^ay  escape, 
even  out  of  hell  itself,  and  most  will,  perhap5|all.  The  Lord 
bids,  "  Fear  Ilim  who  is  able  to  destroy  both  body  and  soul 
in  hell."  Of  course  He  is  (ibh.,  butj^le  never  will,  s^s  Dr. 
Farrar.  It  is  not  an  exceptional  thing  that  the  question 
of  God's  love  and  the  denial  of  His  truth  should  go  together. 

"Vy^e  have  not  forgotten  the  texts,  however.  One  article 
of  the  apostle's  oreed,  it  s^ems,  rests  upon  a  most  "  isolated 
text,"  "  the  sole  passage  "  irt  Scripture  for  it.  According  to 
his  own  words  elsewhere,  we  might  suppose  he  would  not 
care  to  lay  stress  upon  this.  But  we  should  be  mistaken. 
He  thinks  this  isolated  text  sufficient  to  bear  the  entire 
weight  almost  of  the  whole  doctrine  that  the  fate  of  men 
is  not  fixed  by  death,  but  that  they  may  be  saved  afte^  it. 
\  We  could  not  upoii  our  own  principles,  however,  object 
t<)  the  production  of  even  one  passage  if  really  clear.  But 
Dr.  Farrar  takes  no  pains  to  show  that  it  is  so.  While 
speaking  as  he  does  about  texts  torn  from  their  context,  he 
himself  presents  us  with  the  middle  of  a  sentence  from 
Scripture  with  both  ends  cut  off;  and  while  believing,  on 
anol^er  subject,  that  the  "  differing  theories  of  wise  and  holy 


j: 


/= 


^siis^i'l^-^sx^ 


■■■^ 


"THE   GOSPEL   OF  HOPE." 


373 


men'' prove  as  to  it  that  «  God  has  given  no  clear  and  de-/ 
cisive  revelation,"  quotes  this  &s  if  entire  unanimity  prevailed 
about  it,  as  what  "  the  church  in  every  age  has  held,"  when 
he  means  "some  m  the  church,"  more  or  less  as  it  may  be. 

Perhaps  we  must  not  expect  over-much  consistency ;  but  if 
the  Canon  of  Westminster  apprehended  aright  the  greatness 
of  the  issue  he  is  raising,  and  if-  he  believed  in  Scripture  as 
what  alone  could  settle  it,  he  would  not  be  content  to  deal 
in  this  light  and  flippant  way  with  the  authorities  he  adduces" 
One  cannot  but  feel  that  after  all  Scripture  is  very  little  that 
foi*  him,  and  that  his  main  reliance  is  elsewhere.  For  haply  11 
his  own  text  went  against  him  he  would  protest  against 
"  this  ignorant  tyranny  of  isolated  texts,"  as  he  has  done 
already.^nd  vaunt  thedlbre  his  "  Christian  liberty  "  to  adopt 
his  own  independent  thought^. 

But  we,  who   claim   no  such   liberty,  nor  desire   it,  are 
bound  therefore,  nevertheless^  to  accept  his  appeal  to  Scrip- 
ture as  if  it  were  a  loyal  one.     Let  us  first  read  the  passage  / 
then,  as  it  stands  Jn  our  v^ersion,  which  is  sufficiently  cor/ 
rect: —  J 

"For  Christ  also  hath  o^ce  suffered  for  sins,  the  Just  for  tWe 
unjust,  that  He  might  bring  us  to  God,  being  put  to  death  in  the 
flesh,  but  quickened  by  the  Spirit,  by  which  also  [He  went  aifd 
preached  to  the  spirits  in  prison,  which*  sometime  were  clisol)e- 
dient]  wlwn  once  the  long-mffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  \f 
Noah  wliile  the  ark  was  a  preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight 
souls,  were  saved  by  water"  (1  Pet.  iii.  18-20). 

I  have  brack6ted  the  part  that. Canon  Farrar  quotes,  and 
emphasized  the  immediate  context  which  he  omits.  It  ought 
to  speak  for  itself  as  to  the  suitability  of  the  passage  forliis 
purpose. 

First,  it  was  by  the  Spirit  that  Christ  went  and  preached— 
not  personally,  as  the  words  separated  from  their  context 
might  be  thought  to  mean.     It  has  been  sought  to  make 

*  Edw.  White,  who  takes  a  similar  view  of  this  passage  witlx  Dr. 
Farrar,  reads  "  tlmtgh  they  once  had  heen  disobedient  "-^but  this  is 
interpretation,  not  translation  (Life  in  Christ,  p.  ,320). 


■.:.\--- 


r 


i , 


; 


374        FACTS  A^D  TUEOmES  AS  TQ  A  FUTUIIE  STATE.  t;^ 

"  the  Spirit  "  signify  Christ's  human  spirit ;  with  this  neces- 
sary effect,  that  if  lie  were  "quickened  in' His  human 
spirit,"*  that  human  spirit  nrust  liave  itself  died,  in  order  to 
be  quickened.  On  this  account  it  has  been  attempted  tu 
substitute!  "quick,"  or  "alive,"  or  "j»re.served  alive,"  for 
"  quickenm '' ;  meanings -.Avhit4i  the  word  cannot  possibly 
bear.  ";>rude  alive  by  the  Spirit  "f  can  only  refer  to  resur- 
rection, and\thus  it  is  not  Christ  as  a  disembodied  spirit  that 
is  spoken  of  at  all.  '  ^,    , 

But  people  urge  that  "'lie  went  and  preached"  shows  a 
personal  going.  It  has  been  answered  that  in  the  same  way 
He  ^^catne  and  preached  peace,"  in  Eph.  ii.  17,  must  be 
(what  confessedly  it  is  not)  Vl  personal  coming.  "  By  the 
Spirit  He  Went "  excludes  the  thought  entirely. 

Then  further  ys  to  the  "  spirits  in  prison.-^'  '  They  are  in 
prison  now  (that  is  the  force  of  it)  as  having  been  once  dis- 
obedient in  the  da^s  of  Xoah.  But  <lisobedient  to  what  ? 
Why,  to  the  Spirit's  preaching.  It  was  of  these  that  of  oM  ' 
God  had  said,  "  My  Spirit  shall  not  always  strive  with  man.'' 
Plainly  it  was  in  that  time  of  old  that  Christ  had  preached 
to  Ihera,  and  what  should  make  it  certain,  without  any  nice 
■questions  of  translation,  is  that  the  limit  of  God's  striving 
'with  these  antediluvians  is:  ^plainly  set : — "#.]VIy  Spirit  shall 
not  always  strive  Avith  man,  for  that  he  also  is  flesh :  but  hl^ 
days  shall  he  an  h.undnd.  and  t\i:enty  years'''  It  is  strange 
that  some  should  think  that  a  limit  put  to  human  life,  which-, 
was  then,  and  for  generations  afterwards,  far  longer.  It  is 
the  limit  of  the  Spirit's  striving  ^vith  that  generation,  at  the 
end  of  which  the  flood  came.  With  them  the  end  of  the 
Spirit's  striving  and  of  their  life  came  together.  And  it  is 
just  these  whom  Dr.  Farrar  and  others  will  have  it  that 
Christ  specially  singled  out  to  preach  to  more  than  two  thou- 
sand years  afterward,  in  direct  contradiction  of  the  divine 
assertion  that  His  Spirit  would  not  strive. 

*  The  words  afe  quoted  thus  in  "  Yesterday,  To-day,  and  Forever." 
t  Strictly  Iv  jtvevMocTi, '  in  (the  power  of)  the  Spirit.'  The  rw  should 
be  omitted. '— 


"the  oorpel  op  hope/* 


375 


rod's  striviiK' 


Tho  text  is  an  unfortuiiaU}  one  for  Dr.  Fartar.  It  is  un- 
fortunate that  ^o  very  examples  to  which  he  appeals  of 
probation  protracted  heyond  the  «,'ruve,  sh<»ul<l  be  the  very 
examples  given  ns  by  the  word  of  (iod  itself  of  the  precise 
opposite  !  And  we  may  take  his  reasoning  to  reverse  his 
conclusions,  and  say  that,  "  if  the  fate  of  these  4ead  sinners 
iroif  irrevocably  fixed  by  <Jeath,  then  it  must  be  clear  and 
obvious  that  "we  have  no  good  reason  to  suppose  that  ours 
is  not  as  much  as  thei>.  Xay^  it  is  scarcely  reasonable  to 
imagine  that  thpy  are  an  exception  to,  instead  of  an  illustra- 
tipn  of)^  the  universal  rule. 

Canon  Fan  :ir  has  a  similar  text,.,  however,  in  the  next 
chapter  of  the  first  epistle  of  Peter.  Let  us  take  it,  too,  in 
whole  and  not  hi  part,  and  see  if  it  will  lead  us  to  any  Other 
conclusion. 
,  *'Vor/orf/H'ii  ra tt.se  Iwaa  the  gospel  preached  also  to  thfam 
that  are  dead]  /Ji<//  they  mhjlit  he  juthjei  areordiyttj  to  ^^}i 
hi  the  Jfesh,  but  live  according  to  God  in  the  Spirit" 
(1  Pet.  iv.  G). 

Here  Dr.  F.  has  substituted  "  that  irere  dead  "  for  *'  that 
(tre  dead"  without  comment,  evidently  that  we  may  infer 
that  the  people  ^/vz-c  dead  when  preached  to.  But  the  pas- 
sage reads  literally ^' to  the  dead";  and  we  must  g;ither 
the  rest  from  the  context  which  he  omits.  And  her^  it  is 
not  hard  to  see  that  his  mference  is  as  wrong  as  his  transla- 
tion is.  " 

The  apostle  has  been  speaking  of  the  altered  conduct  of 
those  converted  from  heathenism,  and  of  how  the  Gentiles 
around  mis-judged  them.  "  Wherehi  they  think  it  strange 
that  ye  run  not  with  them  to  the  same  excess  of  riot,  speaking 
evil  of  you;  who  shall  give  account  to  Him  that  is  ready  to 
judge  the  quick  and  the  dead."  Thus  shniers  were  judging  in 
their  fleshly  way  the  spiritual  life  that  approved  itself  to  God 
as  such.  Christians  were  judged  afti^the  manner  of  men  in 
a  fleshly  way,  but  lived  according  to  God  in  a  spiritual  one. 
And  for  this — to  separate  them  from  the  ranks  of  these  mis- 
judging  ones,  themselves  the  objects  of  God's  righteous 


'A 


i,: 


870        FA(  tri  A\D  TIIKOUIES  AS  TO  A  PUTtrUE^jOTATE. 

jUdi^'iiioiit.— ha.l  the  gospel  boeii  proachcd  to  thorn.  So  lar 
all  isplHiii;  hiiL  why  "  to  the  dead  "•;*  Surely  hecauMo  tho 
apostle  would  hriujr  in  Uk;  very  thought  Dr.  Farrar  rejeelH, 
that  death  lived  the  coinUtio'u  in  which  it  found  men.  Tliesc 
rigliteous  ones  had  got  tlic  good  of  that  preached  gospel 
which  had  niaile  them  anticipate  the  coming  doom  of  sinners, 
and  accept  the  judgment  of  men  in  the  flesh,  rather  than 
(rod\s  final  and  etertidTJone.  But  could  tliey  possibly  be 
'•  dead  "  before  they  were  preached  to  ?  Not  certainly  if 
the  end  was  to  be  their  being  judged  according  to  men  in 
t  he  flesh  lor  their  changed  lives  !  The  context  is  conclusively 
Ji'ir.'linst  the  restorationist  interpretation.* 

The  other  texts  cited  will  come  uy  more  fittingly  else- 
wliere.     Meanwhile  we  must  look  at  one  or  two  Scriptures 
more  in  this  connection,  which,  altltough  glanced  at  by  Dr. 
Farrar,  are  more  strqngly  put  by  Mr.  Jukes. 
He  thus  speaks  of — 

"the  passiige  respecting  the  sin  [' htnHphemy,'  ii  slfRfed  boj 
ugiiiust  the  IL)!y  Ghost,  which  our  Lord  deeltires  '  shall  not  be 
forgiven,  neither  in  tliisVoild,  not  in  that  which  is, to  come.'t 
Fi>r  this  it  is  concluded  that  the  punishment  for  this  sin  must  be 
nefor-ending.  Bat  does  the  text  say  so  ?  The  whole  passage  is 
lis  follows  :— •  Wherefore  I  say  unto  you,  all  manner  of  sin  and 
■'biiisplu'uiy  sliiill  be  forgiven  unto  men,  but  the  blasphemy 
against  the  Spirit  shall  not  bo  forgiven  unto  men.  And  whoso- 
ever speuketh  a  word  against  the  Son  of  Man  it  shall  be  forgiven 
him  ;  but  Avhosoever  speaketh  against  the  Holy  Ghost,  it  shall 
not  be  foi-giveu  him,  fibither  in  this  age,  nor  the  coming  one.' 

*  Edw.  Wliit."  (Life  in  Christ,  p.  321)  says:  "They  had  the  go^)^A 
preaclied  to  tlicni  in  liades.iii  order  that  tliey  might  be  judged  hv 
Josus  Christ,  and  judged  like  men  in  the  lle.sh,  by  the  same  rule  as 
others  who  have  had  tlie  gospel  on  earth,  that  is,  by  the  gospel  nu'ssago 
itself;  so  that  ihey  should  not  necessarily  perish  under  the  law,  hut 
•  may  live  (enter  into  life)  according  to  God  in  the  Spirit.'  "  He  does 
not  see  that  they  who  receive  the  gospel  are  not  "judged,"  and  if  they 
were,  could  not  escape  condemnation.  For  men  are  judged  not  "  by 
the  gospel,"  which  is  a  dfeani  of  his  own,  but  "according  to  their 
Works." '. 


tMatt.  xii.  32. 


"THE   OOSl'KL   OF    HOPE." 


377 


ing  to  men  in 


These  words,  so  fur  from  proving  tlio  gofieniUy  received  doe- 
triuo,  that  sin  not  forgiven  hero  can  never  bo  forgiven,  distinctly 
assort — first,  that  ail  manner  of  sin  and  bliiHphemy  shall  be  for- 
rriven  unto  men, — Hocondly,  that  some  sins,  those  namely  against 
tlu!  Son  of  Man,  can  bo  forgiven,  apparently  in  this  ago,  —and 
tliiidly,  that  other  sins,  against  the  Holy  (lliost,  (-aniiot  bo  for- 
given either  here  or  in  the  coming  jige  ;  which  last  words  surely 
imply  that  some  sins  not  here  forgiven  may  bo  forgiven  in  the 
coming  age,  the  sin  or  blasphemy  against  th(3  Holy  Crliost  not 
being  of  that  number.     This  is  wliat  the  text  asserts  ;  and  it  ex- 
plains why  God  has  so  Jong  withheld  the  g(!neraf  out-^pouriugof 
His  promised  Spirit ;  for  man  cannot  reject  or  speak  against  the 
Spirit,  until  the  Spirit    comes  to  act  uptm  him.     God  has  two 
wnys  of  teaching  men  ;  first,  by  His  word,  the  hitter  or  human 
form  of  truth,  that  is,  the  Son  of  Man,  in  which  case;  a  man  may 
n  joct  God's  call  without  knowing  that  ho  is  really  doing  h0  ;  the  < 
etluir,  in  and  by  the  Spirit,  which  convinces!  tne  heart,  >^ieh 
tliereforo  cannot  be  opposed  without  leaving  men  eouscW&Jy 
guilty  of  rejecting  God.     To  reject  this  Ipt  cuts  man  oft"  ll#m 
the  light  and  life  of  the  coming  world.     This  sin  therefore  is  not 
forgiven  ;  neither  in  this  age,  nor  in^the  coming  one.     But  the  . 
text  ssiys  nothing  of  those  'ages  to  come,'  elsewhere  re\;ealed  to 
us  ;  much  less,  dcjes  it  assert  that  the  punishment  of  sin  not  here 
forgiven  is  never-ending.  "*  "^ 

Dr.  Farrar  does  not  go  quite  so  far ;  he  says  : — f 

"If  alc^y  he  rightly  rendered,  as,  in  nearly  every  pjissage 
where  it  occurs,  it  nuii/  be  rightly  rendered,  by  'age,'  out  Lord 
only  says  that  there  is  one  particular  sin — and  what  sin  this 
is  no  one  has  ever  known^ — which  is  so  heinous  as  not  to  be  par- 
donable either  in  this  (the  Jewish)  or  the  coming  (the  Christian) 
dispensation.  Nothing  therefore  is  of  necessity  implied  resjji'ct- 
ing  the  world  beyond  the  grave.  But  if  it  be,  how  of  erwhelming 
is  the  argument  with  which  I  am  supplied  !  Even/  sin  and  hln^- 
phemy  shtll  he  forgiven,  our  Lord  says, — without  further  limita- 
tion, and  with  no  shadow  of  a  hint  that  He  refers  to  this  life 
only — a  gloss  which  indee<l  His  words  directly  excludes  ;  every 
sill  and  blasphemy  shall  bo  forgiven  hero  or  hereafti'r,  except 
one  !    *  If  one  sin  pnly  is  excluded  from  forgiveness  in  that  coming 

*  Restitution,  pp.  120, 121.         f  Eternal  Hope,  Pref.,  pp.  xl,  xlii 


i 


l-AC'IS  AMD  tULuUlLS  A.S  To  A  I'lTUUi:  tiTATt:. 


■  I 


V 


I'f 


t  i 


ago,  uther  .siuM  cannot  stuuJ  «u  the  sunu!  luvcl,  jiud  tin;  dimucss  < 
btliiml  tho  VL'il  is  lit  m)  with  ut  least  u  gloam  t»f  hope* " 

JVIr.  Oxonhani  has  still  another  viou- :* — 
"  Now  on  this  verso  I  observe,  first,  that  oiu-  Lord  sjiys  uotliiii.». 
about  hell  ;  anil  secouilly,  thftt  what  lie  thjes  say  bears  on  t.'xuiu- 
iuation  no  reseniblamu)  to  an  assertion  of  the  popular  doctrine  of  " 
indh\ss  niisi-ry.  ,  Our  Lord  d»H'lares  that  the're  is  a  sin  a'Minst  the 
Holy  (rhost  for  which  there  is  no  atpf6iS  either  here  or  hereafter. 
lie  uses  the  Words  mpfn,?  ,iii,l  lupMiut,  (he  root-jueaning  of  wiiieh 
is  'sending  away,'  'irett^uf,'  rid  <if.'     H,.  .ledaivs  of  this  sin  tlmt 
it  can  nf^ver  be  got  rid  of  ;  i.  e.,  something  of  the  hin,  its  charac- 
ter, its  consoiinrnces,  will  last  on  adways-  this  is  what  Ho  really- 
says  ;  and  is  it  beyond  the  reach  even  of  our  ])resent  tuidcrstandin^' 
to  conceive'  that  the  jMnal  ci>nse<|uences  of  wi4fid  sin  against  the 
Holy  ^Spirit,  vi/.,  e.  g.,  loss  «)f  capacity  to  know  and  to  love  tliu 
truth,  and  Him  wlio  is  truth,  may  well  be  irremediable  eitlur 
h(>re  or  hereafter  V     How  great  such  a  penalty  would  be,  or  in 
what  manner  it  would  be  fi-lt  or  received,  we  have  no  means  of 
knowing  ;  but  we    feel   at   oncis   that    this  penalty  is  something 
wholly  diirei-eiit  from  whaf  is  commonly  meant  by  eternal  piui- 
ishment  ;  it  is  eompatilthi  with  existence  in  heavcm." 

The  three  views  Ijoinuj  so  dissimilar,  it  will  l)e  no  i^roat 
marvel  if  S('rii>tu re  be  aijaiu  dissimilar  from  them  all.  We 
shall  take  them  in  retro«.ri'ade  order,  Mr.  Oxenham  first. 

His  view  is  that  "  6-oy/<</A///;/ of  the  sin,  its  cliaracter,  it.s 
conse<iucnceSj"  ho  does  not  know  exActly  what,  will  last  on 
forever.  But  surely  that  is  loose  and  unsatisfactory  enoui^'h. 
\ltpttjiii  Q\u\  (x'C^oi'^  are  the  lOidy  words  for  "remit"  ami 
''  remission," the  latter  also-the  only  word  for  ''  forgiveness.' 
The  jjhrases  used  are,  "it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him,"  and 
-*'hath  never  forgiveness,  hut  is  in  danger  of  (or  sulyect  to) 
vXarn^X  J  tt.<  I  lime  nt  "  (Mark  iii.  29).  Tliat  defines  it  plainly 
enough.  *'  Ilath-never  '  sending  away  '  "  would  ])c  insuffer- 
al>le,  not  inendy  in -sound  but  in  sense;  and  if  one  subjeet 
to  eternal  jud^nfent  can  be  in  heaven,  heaven  can  scarcely 
be  what  Scripture  represents  it.  It  AVould  be  no  Uettcr  fof 
Mr.  Qxenliam  If  we  i^aad  with   Canon  Farrar  and  others, 

*  Letter  III.  (a).  ' 


ui:  sTATt;. 


'V«iB   GOSPEL  .OF   IIOI'K." 


379 


instcail  of  eternal  judj^iaent,  "  eternal  sin."    I  cannot  accept 
:!io  n-.-uling,  Imt  it  is  imn^itl^rial  to  the  present  (piestion. 

Dr.  Kanur's  own  reasonini^  turns  upon  tlu*  rendering  of 
"till."*  worM  "  iuu\  "  tlie  world  to  <mihu\  '  Wlietlier  we  read 
it  "  aj^e  "'  <»r  not,  the  "  worhl  to  lonie  "  is  not  in  Scripture 
heaven  or  hell  or  hades.  It  is  undoubtedly  what  the  Jews 
understoo<l  well  and  looked  lor,  the  world  under  Messiah, 
which  Christians  luihapplly  loss  know  under  that  title  than 
as  the  niillenniuui.  It  is  even  called  (in  Heb,  Li.  ;'»)  the 
'' liiihitahle  (earth)  to  come,*'  the  word  used  for  "'the  world" 
untlcr  Cajsar's  rule,  wlwch  he  decreed  should  he  taxed 
(Luke  ii.  1).  If  not  (as  Dr.  F.  tliinks  it  may  he)  the  Chris- 
tian dispensation,  it  is  yet  a  dispensation  atfeotint;  nien  in 
the  hody,  not  "spirits  in  prison  "  nor  the  resurreetion  of 
judi^nient. 

Con.seipiently  when  it  is  said,  whosoever  shall  blaspheme, 
it  shall  not  be  forgiven  him  "ithi-'r  in  this  world  or  that 
which  is  to  come,  it  does  nO^pTel'  to  forgiveness  beyond  the 
grftve."1fflr  moan  tltc  same  perton  in  this  world  and  the  world 
to  come,  but  that  the  sin  would  nofbe  remitted  to  any  oho 
who  comipitte<l  it  in  either  a^e.  '  ^ 

Even  Mr.'  Jukes  falls  into  the  same  error,  but  he  is 
bolder,  and  adds  various  suppositions  of  his  own  to  it.  He 
H^ippoHcs  that  the  sin  against  the"  Son  of  Man  Would  be  for- 
given only  in  this  age.*-^JIe  rupposes  that  some  sins  not 
forgiven  here  may  be  forgiven  in  the  coming  age.  And  the 
ages^eyond  being  ^tute  unnoticed,  there  may  yet  be  for- 
givene^  there.  -  Hit  in  trutii  tlj'v  reason  for  not  jroin"- 
beyond  the  "  ago  to  come  "  is  an  opposite  one:  It  h  l)ccausc 
beyond  the  millennial  age  is  the  ju<lgment  and  eternity,  and  • 
all  is  fixe<l  fort^ver.  We  have  already  examined  Mr.  Jukes' 
theory  of  these  ages  of  eternity,  on  which,  of  course,  his 
"view  of  this  text  is  based;  and  need  not,  and  shall  not, 
return  to  it  again. 

But  a, word  wo  must  yet  say  a^  to  another  Scripture,  where 

— the  '*  great  gulf  fixed  "  assures  us  of  the  impossibility  in  tlie 

death  state  at  least,  of  any  ]).assing  lro?n  the  flame  of  torment 


1 


i' 


\  380         FACTS  AS-D  TIIKOUIES  A3  lO  A  PCTUFIK  STATE. 

on  thf  one  si<le  to  the  comfort  in  Abraham's  bosom  on  the 

other.     .Mr.  Juki'M,  «)f  courHo,  objeias  that  it  is  a  parabli',  l.ui 

that  \\v  h.ive  conHidoriMl.     \o  doubt  the  fxpri'WHions  heir 

ar«'  flLjiirativc;  yH  th»'y  txprcss  vt-ry  plainly  what  they  fi-^r 

-V^^re.     He  also  tells  us  that  this  K^oat  gulf  li.Yed,  "  thou-^lt 

iThorly  impas.sablc  for  man,  i.s  not  so  for  '  Him  who  hath  tilo 

key  of  David,  who  openeth  and  no  man  shutteth,  an<l  shut- 

tetJi  and  no  man  openeth,'  who  •  hath  the  keys  of  death  anri 

hell';  and  who,  as*  He  has  Himself  broken  the  bars  of  death 

for  men,  can  yet   'say  to  the  prisoner,  Go  forth;  to  them 

that  are  in  darkness,  Show  yourselves.'  "* 

There  is  more  of  the  sjime  kind,  always  confounding  a 

day  of  grace  with  a  day  of  wrath  and  judgment,  and  assum- 
ing that  "judgment  without  mercy ''t  shall  be  mercy  still. 
The  great  gulf  fixed  is  not  impassable  to  Christ,  he  says.  - 
But  Christ  is  thg  very  One  who  has  fixed  it.  He  h.is 
ordained  that  none  shall  pass  it,  and  that  settles  it  for  the 
<leath  state  at  least  that  none  shall.  Aftt'r  this,  eternal 
judgmt^nt  allows  no  escape. 

Yet  Dr.  Farrar  will  have  it  that  the  parable  shows  us 
•'  how  rapidly  in  that  condition  '(\n  which  the  rich  man  is 
I !  ^^'*'»   '"  hades]  a  moral  renovation  has  been  wrought  in  a 

j  '  sinful  and  selfish  soul."|     II«y  has'not  told  us  how  it  shows 

•    ;  this,  but   I   suppose   by  the   concern   he    manifests  for  his 

{  v'  '  iMvthren.     But  the  motives  for  this  the  parable  does  not 

I  '                       -'J'^^v',  .so  that  it  would  be  difficult  to  assign   its  true  moral 

f  ,        significance^   The   fact   remains   of  a   "great   gulf  fixed"  ' 

I  .,  ^^              already  in  the  intermediate  state  between  the  two  cla.s.ses  of 

r  just  and  uiijust,— a  gulf  which   cannot  be  traversed  upon 

l  ^''^^'^'''  ''••le.     "After  deatli,  the  judgment,"  and  the  nature 
^"'^  duration  of  that  final  award  we  haVe  been  for  some  time 

'  '               considering:. 

^^"^  *»1J  Scripture  assures  us  of  the  momentous  fact  that 

the  significance  of  the  present  life  is  just  tjiis,  4hat  here  and 

'  ;  ■  ]  '  " now  is  dccid^d^n's  eteroal  destiny.    He  is  called  to  repent 

[  *  RosUluUon,  p.  137.^  t  James  ii.  13. 

t  Eternal  Iln;,..,  Prof,  xxxi.,  note. 

ii:!''  '■  „■■-".:.■..  ■.■■.■■■■■.-     ■    -  .  .    ■  « 


.F.  STATE. 


^         AN  Simi.lST-UKS 


roUATIOXISM. 


381 


TO- u AY,  lost  God -Bwear  '  lu'  Khali  not  enter  into  His  rest'* 
(Ilcb.  iy.  7,  11).  An«l  who  shall  say  that  brief  "Sm  imleed  It 
in,  the  pri'seiit  life  may  not  as  fully  test  the  in<Ii\i<lual  man,'' 
as  iiMletinite  ages  of  prolwition  or  ett-rnity  itself?  The  judg- 
ment after  death  it  nui.st  bo  allowed  is  aeeonlintr  to  deed-i  done 
in  the  hnhj  and  no  other.  If  these  did  not  after  all  eharaetcr- 
\iM  the  inan,  that  judgment  wouhl  be  partial,  and  therefore 
false.  It  is  in  vain  then  to  ple)id  for  the  extension  of  a  day 
of  graee  beyond  the  i)resent,  wliich  bring)*  with  it  no  exten- 
sion of  responsibility  KU<rh  as  the  day  of  judgment  would 
take  notiee  of;  as  vain  as  to  plead  that  the  (lelumna-^dg- 
ment  of  one  whose  eorpse  was  ei»st  out^amid  the  worm  and 
flame  of  the  polluted  valley  is  the  type  of  a  remediable,  or 
a  tcqninable  retribution. 


r^.    ^* 


CIIAPTEli  XXXVIII. 

A-VXniIl-IST-Ki:ST0KATlONISM. — Ml!.   DUXX's  TUEOUY. 

It  is  no  wonder  that — eoiisidering  the  moral  argument^ 
that  have  been  i)ut  forth  to  sustain  it— annihilationism  f^iould 
have  failed  to  satisfy  the  minds  of  many  of  its  a<lvocates. 
It  is  well  to  note,  in  looking  briefly  at  the  views  how  to 
come  before  us,  that  they  arc  the  product  of  a  mind  inllu- 
enced  by  speculatire  considerations,  anxiously  seeking  a 
way  of  escape  from  what  in  the  first  instance  was  believed 
to  be  the  teaching  of  ►Scripture.  I  mean,  it  was  not  Scrip- 
ture itself  that  raised  question  in  the  mind,  nor  led  him  who 
puts  them  forth  away  from  what  passes  current  as  orthodoxy"" 
as  to  these  points,  but  certain  fe^elings  of  Iris  own  which  rose 
up  against  it,  and  under  which  he  sought  and  at  last  found, 
as  he  believes,  a  way  of  escape.  It  is  precisely  in  the  sam^' 
way  that  infidelity  rejects  Scripture  altogether,  and  wo  shall 
have  to  consider  it  more  fully  at  another- time.  I  am  not  by 
this  pronouncing  upon  the  result  at  which  he  has  arrived. 


382        FACTS  A5fD  TnEOllIKS  A>S  TO  A  FTTTURE  STATK. 

I  am  only  stating  that  (truo  or  false)  this  is  how  he  got 
upon  the  path  which  le<l  hiin  to  it.  .- 

;,  Mr.  Diunrs  theory  i.>^  a  coiniM)!!!!*]  of  two  apparently  verv 
dissimilar  thnig.^,aiuiiliirationisin  and  restorationisin.  It  di- 
minishes the  former  to  the  least  possible  degree,  reservIn«T  it 
for  some  ob.stlnate  trtlnsgressors  only.  In  this  respect  jt  re 
.semblca  the  doctrine  (or  o//<' of  the  doctrines)  of  the  Talmud 
already  noticed,  which  in  asimilar  Avay  cond)ines  the  theories. 
In  other  respects  :Mr.  Dunn's  system  is  (juite  ditlerent,  how- 
ever, for  those  finally  saved  with  him  never  come  into 
Gehenna.  ** 

For  convenienc^e  and  brevity  we  may  take  Mr.  lllain's 
representation  of  the  views,  of  which  he  has  become  the 
zealous  advocate,  lie  has  incorporated  in  the  book*  Avith 
which  he  has  replficed  his  former  one,  a  letter  by  Mr.  Dunn 
himself,  so  that  we  shall  have  the  doctrine  also  in  the  words 
of  its  first  teacher;  The  main  points  moreover  are  all  that 
wc  have  space  to  4<?al  with. 

Mr.  Blain  first  ogives  the  chief  points  in  Mr.  Dunn's 
"  theory  "  (as  Mr.  13.  himself  calls  it),  as  follows.  We  shall 
look  at  them  as  they  are  stated  : — 

"1.  Gpd,  in  all  the  dispensations  previous  to  the  second  per- 
sopji^co-ftiing  of  Christ;  has  been  and  is  .still  calling  out  and  prc- 
^paring  a  select  pcoplb,  called  in  both  Testaments  'the  church,' 
vtlie  'erect,'  'the  bride,  the. Lamb's  wife,'  'the  first-f mits, '  '  fost-^^ 
born,'  *a  chosen  generation,'  and  also  'kings  and  priests,'  to  in- 
dicate that  they  are  to  be  rulers  and  teachers  in  a  dispensation 
yet  to  come.     It  was  this  elect  people  that  Chi-ist  meant,  when 
Ho  said  Ho  '  prayed  not  io)e  the  vorH,'  and  whpm  Ho  Called  the 
'little  flock  who  should  possess  tho  kingdom,'  or  to  whom  'tho 
Father  would  give  tho  kingdom,' meaning  by  the  kingdom  tho 
■gorernment   m   the   world   to   come.   .   .To   be  one  of   Christ's 
.    bride    we  must  find  the  'narrow  way,'  tho  'strait  gate,'  which 
comparatively  few  find  in   these  dispensations.     Thus,   if  this 
view  be  sustained,  these  texts  and  others  like  them,  are  no  proof 
'    of  only :  a  few  being  finaUy   saved.>    Others  will  bo  saved  as 
subjects." 

*  11(^)0  fur  our  Race  (BufTiilo,  N.  V.,  2ii.l  od..  1,S7.'!) 


!ir> 


ANNIU1L1ST-HKST0I14'M0NIS3I.  3^3 

The  first  part  of  this  statement  is  in  the  main  true,  that 
those  called  out  before  the  coming  of  the  Lord  are  to  reign 
with  Him  during  the  dispensation  that  follows  His  coming. 
This  we  have  before  cpnsidered.  It  is  no  "  theory  "  but  a 
ScrijitureKtatemeht,  midfeeiiC^d  by  many  long  before  Mr 

unn.   ' 

It  is  uot  true  that  this  mea^hat  there  will  be  salvation 
for  those  who  die  unsaved  now  ;  nor  is  '*  election "  what 
.^Ir.  Blain  states.     But  that  is  not  our  subject  here. 
i"2.  Tlitj  Jewish  Uiitionwas  called  out  to  be  the  liejidship  of 
nations  (.s/V)  or  to  be  what  is  meant  by  the  elect  church,  us  the 
^irophccies  show  plainly.     See  Exod.  xix.  5  :  '  if  yo  AtiU  obey 
.  ,  .  ye  shall  be  a  peculiar  treasure  unto  me  above  all  people  "• 
for  all  the  earth  is  vainG,  and  ye  shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of'-' 
prit'Sts,  an  holy  nation.'    But  this  promise  was  conditional,  and 
.    as  they  were  not  obedient,    and   finally   rejected   Christ  as   a 
naUon,  they  became  the  broken  off  branches  of  Eom  xi   17  and ' 
only  the  '  election  '  named  by  Paul,  or  the  really  righteous  among 
them,  of  every  age,  together  with  the  called  of  the  Gentiles,  are 
finally  to  constitute  this  'kingdom  of  2>riests  and  kings'  (9)-to - 
1 ..« the  bride  of  Christ.     This  is  the  people  meant  in  Psa.  xxii.  30, 
.51.      .^Mieuh  v.  3  tells  us  how  long  they  {'the  rest.'  Rom.  xi.  71 
arc/to  be  blinded,  and  that  they  are  to  be  restored  :  '  Therefore 
wiU  ye  give  them  up,  until  the  time  that  she  which  travaileth  has 
brj)ught  forth  ;  then  the  remnant  of  his  brethren  shall  return 
unto  he  children  of  Israel. '    Read  from  ver.  1-4  and  comp.  ver. 
3  with  Rom.  XI.  25-27,  and  we  see  this  given  up  remnant  are  to 
be  ^save(l.     The  church  now  travails  and  will,  until  the  '  fulness 
of  the  Gentiles  is  brought  in,'  then  the  '  broken  off  remnant '  is 

'elect '»^^^*''*^'''^  ^""""^  '"^'  '"'"  '?^I«r«eV  meaning  the 
Mr.  Blain  reads  Scripture,  I  am  compelled  to  say,  very 
carelessly  indeed.  There  is  some  truth  here,  but  more 
error,  as  will  be  apparent  in  a  moment.  It  is  not  true  in 
the  first  place  that  to  Israel  as  a  nation  were  ever  given 
«ven  conditionally,  the  promises  which  are  now  ours  in 
Christ,  nor  that  believers  now  inherit  the  promises  which 
were  once  theirs.-  Rom.  ix.4  should  keep  anyone  from  con- 
founding these,  as  it  shows  that  the  "  promises "  criven  tc 


I 


Wi 


m- 


384         FACTS  AND  TUEOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUllE  STATE. 

the  nation  still  were  theirs  (although  for  a  time  in  abey- 
ance)  after  they  had  rejected  Christ.  The  passage  in  Exod. 
xix.  shows  that  these  promises  had  to  do  with  an  cai'(/dt/,a.H 
ours  with  a  Amye;i/y  inheritance.  It' is  quite  true- that  the 
two  correspond  more  or  less  in  their  different  spheres,  the 
earthly  being  the  type  of  the  heavenly,  as  the  Jerusalem  of 
the  future  corresponds  (with  some  essential  differences)  to 
the  New  Jerusalem  of  the  Apocalypse.*  But  the  eartiily 
and  heavenly  are  easily  recognizable  and  abundantly  dis- 
tinct. Scripture  never  confounds  them,  if  interpreters  have 
done  so  ;  and  it  is  not  responsible  for  their  riiistakes. 

But  the  last  statements  of  Mr.  Blain  are  (jqually  careless 
at  the  least.     Where  does  Mic.  v.  speak  of  the  restoration 
of  the  blinded  Jews?     It  does  speak  of  the  rejection  of 
Messiah,  and  th4t  for  that  the  nation  would  be  given  up 
until  the  time  that  she  which  travailed  had  brought  forth. 
(I  do  not  take  that  last  expression  as  referring  to  the  Chris- 
tian church,  but  nefcd  not  contest  it  here :  thb  result  is  much 
the  same.)     Then  V  the   remnant  of  Ills  brethren  "—the 
brethren  of  the  "  Judge  of  Israel"  whom  tljey  had  smitten 
on  the  cheek— *'shftll  return  unto  the  children  of  Israel.'' 
Mr.   Blain   makes   "fJie   remnant"  the   unbelievers — "  tlie 
brokei|»off  remnant "  he  calls  them,  while  the  apostle  shows 
us  the  remnant  as  theV"  election  of  grace  "  and  not  broken 
off.     The  remnant  of  IlU  ]>rethren  (remembering  the  Lord's 
words  to  the  Jewish  iWplc,  Matt.  xii.  49,  .50)  are  plainly 
this  bellevinr/  remnant,  "  Siose  who  do  the  Avill  of  His  Father 
in  heaven  "  whom  alone  lie  accounts  such  ;  while  "  the  chiK 
dren   of  Israel "   shuuld  be  quite  evidently  the  nation  at 
large.     So  that  it  is  the  believers  who  return  to  the  nation 
of  Israel,  not  the  unbelieverV  who  return  to  the  believers. 

Mr.  Blain  may  have  difficklty  in  understanding  the  sen- 
tenoe  road  in  that  way,  but  the  reason  is,  not  that  it  is  really 
difficult,  but  that  his  views  arb  exactly  opposed  td  the  true 
meaning.  This  is  often  the  apparent  obscurity  of  Scripture, 
that  it  does  not  fit  with  our v'\ theories  "  of  what  it  should 


*  See  ante,  "  Old  Testl 


Iment  Shadows, 


.j^^U^.., 


AN\M  II 1  Li!*T-!ti:s  rouA  no  N  IS  M.' 


o85 


say.     Its  meaning  is  very  simply  thirf:  during  the  present 
unbelief  of  IsraolAbclievers  among  them  are  necessarily  by 
their  very  faith  sepWated  from  the  nation.     In  Christ  there 
is  "  neither  Jew  nor\  Greek."     Btit  Aviicn  the  time  shall  have 
come  for  God  to  fulfil  His  ancient  unforgotten  promises  to 
the  nation  as  such,  when  Israel,  in  travail  withhcr  hopesof  a 
progeny  shall  have  brought  forth,*  then  believers  among 
them  will,  of  course,  iind  their  place  again  in  connection 
with  the  nation.     This^  will  not  be,  as  we  have  seen,!  till 
"they  look  upon  Himw^hom  they  have  pierced"  and  mourn 
for  having  pierced  Him,  When  "  lie  cometh  with  clouds,  and 
every  eye  shall  sec  Ilim  '\  too. 

That  is,  when  Christ  bas*takon  up  His  people  of  the 
present  and  the  past,  and  When  Ho  is  preparing  blessings 
(though  through  judgmenfc  for  the  earth,  then  the  time  of 
His  giving  Israel  up  will  lie  over;  and  with  His  return  to 
them,  His  brethren  //r/;w/ork  (not  the  individuals  gone  to 
heaven  before  it)  will  becon^e  identified  with  the  nation  as 

of  old. 

This  explains  how  according  to  Rom.  xi.,  the  *<  fulness  of 
the  Gentile's  "  will  be  come  iri,  and  so  "  all  Isi'ael "  saved  : 
i.  e.,  not  the  former  unbelievers,  but  the  nation  as  such  at 
the  time  indicated.  Mr.  Blain  (Confounds  these  in  a  manner 
not  very  creditable  to  his  intelllijence,  and  certainly  entirely 
unauthorized  by  the  text^  he  has  broduccd.  '^*     ' 

"3.  When  Christ  comes  per.s,,„u%,  which  ho  thinks  win  bo 
soon,— the  church,  ihe  tried  and  puVified,  Avill  bo  raised  first 
'Christ  thfe  first-fruits  ;  afterwards  theV  that  are  Christ's,  at  His 
coming.'  They  will  be  raised  immort^  ....  will  be  associated 
with  Christ  in  judging  the  worid  :  '  thb  saints  shall  judge  the 
world/ "  "  .  -        ^ 

As  to  this  we  have  alreaV^y^lookod  at  Scripture ;  nor  do  T 
question  its  truth.  The  next  poii^  brings  out  fully  the  dis- 
tinct feature  of  the  system,  and  its  essential  error : 

"4.   At  Christ's  coming.^tfid^after  the  resurrection  of  the 

*  Comp.  Isa.  IxYi.  7-12,  and  many  other  places  in  the  prophets.^ 
t  See  ante,  cht  x.,  "  The  rurification  anU  Blessing  of  the  Earth," 


X 


.■■-*■■ 


h  I 


380         FACTS  AND  TUEOUIES  AS  TO  A   t'L TUUli  STATE. 

t 

I 

elect  church  (how  soon  uot  told),  all  who  have  died  impenitent 

will  be  raised,  and  in  due  time  Christ  will  be  made  known  to 

them  by  the  elect  church  ;  or  by  Christ  appearing  to  them  as 

Ho  did  to  Saul ;  and  the  offer  of  life  bo  made  to  all  who  have 

uot  'blasphemed  agaiust   the  Holy  Ghost'  or  'sinned  witfnlhj 

after  having  a  knowledge  of  the  truth,'  in  former  dispensations. 

In  this  coming  dispensation,  and, in  due  time,  light  being  given 

the  y««.s.s\vill   rei)ent   and   accept  Christ,  and   so   bo  saved  ;  Kut  .' 

with  what  he  calls  the  leWn-  salvation, — will   not  reign   with 

Christ,  or  be  of  the   bride, 'but  be  'Ihe  nations  '  outside  of  the 

XcAy  Jerusalem,  as  told  of  in  Rev.  xxi."  22-26.     LikevKintf  of  hers,    . 

Ber.  a:r.  swms  dark  to  ///w— says  but  little  about  it  ;  but  decides 

there  will  l)e  a  dispensation,  called  thrtt  of  '  the  fulness  of  times,' 

before  Christ  gives  up  the  kingdom.  .  .  As  to  the  time  this  dis- 

l)ensatiou  is  to  last,  he'is  indefinite,  not  being  guided  by  the  one 

thousand  year-j  of  Rev.  xx."  ~ 

It  is  no  AVonder  that  "not  being  guided"  by  God's  ex- 
press "  revelation  "  upon  the'subject,  Mr.  Dunn  should  be 
in  the  dark.  Had  lie  been  so  guided,  he  would  have  seen 
that  the  thousand  years  he  can  m^ke  nothing  of,  are  the  • 
wbole  duration  (or  nearly  so)  of  that  reign  of  righteousness 
which  precedes  the  eternal  state,  and  that  the  resurrection 
does  not  take  place  till  after  this,  when  the  heavens  and 
.  earth  flee  away. 

But  the  whole  idea  of  a  rpsurrection  ofthe  wicked,  which 
is  not  to  judgment,  is  the  flat  contradiction  of  Scripture,  not 
interpretation'  at  all.  The  Lord  has  expressly  divided  "  all 
that  are  in  the  graves  "  into  these  two  classes  raised  to  oppo- 
site destinies :  "  they  that  have  done  good  unto  the  resurrec- 
tion of/{/fe,  and  they  that  have  done  evil  unto  the  resurrection 
of  judgment:'  Mr.  Blain  tells  us  "  the  sorrow,  shame,  and 
self-reproach  felt  by  Saul  (of  Tarsus)  and  tlie  th^ee  thou- 
sand at  the  day  of  Pentecost  "  will  be  "the  main,  if  not  the 
only,  wailing  and  bitterness  which  the  impenitent  risen 
dead  will  experience,"  and  that  "  only  as  they  will  lose  the 
•  crown,'  or  '  birlh -right '  blessing."  A  man  that  can  make 
oh.  that  to  be  the  n'surrection  of  ju.lgmonl,  such  as  it  is  de- 


\ : 


■■■"  ■  ' -^    '        '/.■'-"  ■■'' 

ANNIIIIUST-RESTORATIOXISM.,  "  387 

scribed  in  the  passages  we  have  at  large  considered,  it  seems 
really  usoiess  to  argue  with.  »*"  seems 

This  whole   idt-a  of  i  rnonft.,^^**  /-  . 

,  .  ins  cvci.  the  .emWanco  of  sustZin.  it     M,    n"  """/''"' 

TLtt ' ':;;  .f r  -vo,  hi™.,,; ...  m/j,,,.  ,^^t: :• 

uytaung      all,      .every"   a.,d"tl,o    whole"  as  meaning 
often  the  «ia,».v,  or  great  majoritj-.  I'ltanmg 

"  The  term  '  the  Iciiigdom  of  Goil  '  "  Jr,.  K  »i      i  ., 
comes  an  important  ™°-d  in  this  I Iry     Vf.        ""'  ""•  "  '"'- 

"wiH,  this  ide„;th„«.yi™,/e,,^<  „.i::"'",f-"'  ^"■' 

loa,l,.th  nnto  W,.  •  ,;,  ,.J,,  ^,j,,„^P     """•''"  -'^  »"o  way  tl.>t 
No  doubt  it  is.    Fe«-  difliculties  could  be  cxneotod  f,o 

wh.bearsdiree.,r:;onru:Xe„r::,^r:r  ^~  ^» 

orte^uZi  trurout\":trr7'"'.t"f  «'~ 

.ive.!.  m  satTsfaer::  ^st^tr  b^t  ^ 
creation  of  man  seemed  to  be  a  failure 

Vmere,ower::nX;h:rSteV^^^^^^ 

:>trird3^rtres''r'  -^---itL^- 

"smuch  as  he  snee"ed»Tn"  '      »   '""*"",'«'"'«  conqueror,  in- 
iixaKeofhisMaZT^  ,    Preventmg  man's  restoration  to  the 

-cc.  -itrthe°.^eptiol  tfT  ■  °'"''^-  ""'  *^  '"'"<'  "—» 

-c  the  truth,  »u7^;,i:i^rc/;;:^i:— ■;? "-  - 


1 


888 


FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTUREl  SlATE. 


r- 


Now  tho-ruin  of  man  is  not  merely  the  devil's  work it  is 

man's  oicn.  We  have  all  heard  how  at  a  ctirtain  ])lacc  the 
Lord  cast  out  a  legion  of  «levils  with  a  wor.l,  an.l  how  (he 
people  of  the  plaee,  instead  of  weleoming  the  Deliverer, 
prayed  Him  to  depart.      80  it  is  ever  wherever  a  soul  is 

•  finally  lost.  It  will  not  do  to  say  it  is  the  devil's  triumph: 
if  it  were  that,  ]\[r.  Dunn's  scheme  would  be  no  more  satis- 
factory  than  what  he  gave  up,  for  the  question  of  how  many 
times  God  has  suffered  defeat  is  a  very  minor  thing  coni- 

jr  pared  with  the  question,  Ao<«  could  lie  sufcr  defait  at  all  / 
If  a  hundred  souls  lost  were  Satan's  victorv,  in  these  Go-l 
would  be  a  hundred  times  defeated  !  If  that  be  possible,  a 
million  or  a  billion  such  might  be. 

,  ^  We  do  not  believe  in  Satan's  triumph  in  even  one  smglf 
instance.  He  has  been  permitted  to  gain  a  temporary  ad- 
vantage, and  by  it  a  worse  and  utter  defeat  at  last.  Hell  /. 
not  his  "  work,''  hut  hisjudjment,  aud7<e  does  not  "  overcome 
when  he  is  judged."    . 

But  I  agree  with  Mr.  Dunu  that  the  settlement  of  the 
question  of  the  existence  of  evil  by  mere  physical  annihlhi- 
tion  would  be  a  mere  riddance  by  power  of  what  might  be 
well  thought  could  not  be  got  rid  of  in  any  other  way. 
But  he  continues  :— 

"Further— and  this  seems  equally  impossible-^the  scheme 
represents  God  ns  allowing  hunOi-eds  of  milhons  to  come  into  ex- 
istence evei-y  thirty  years,  under  conditions  that  all  but  conqjel 
their  utter  misery  and  et(  rnal  ruin  after  u  brief,  painful,  and  appa- 
rently unmeaning  earthly  existence. "  ' 

But  neither  can  this  be  a  true  representation  of  the  matter. 
We  arc  as  sure  as  ^Ir.  Dunn  is,  that  God  would  never  pun- 
ish for  eternity  what  was  the  fruit  more  of  ignorance  and 
weakness  amid  the  pressure  of  circumstances  too  great  to 
be  resisted  by  human  strength.  If  that  is  the  true  state  of 
the  case,  men,  or  a  mass  of  them,  would  be  more  the  objects 
of  pity  than  of  blame.  And  He  who  is  infinite  in  pity,  and 
is  slow  to  judgment,  because  He  delighteth  in  mercy,  could 
not  overlook  the  essential  diflFerence.     God  will  not  damn 


'^■.r- 


"VV. 


en  one  sinrjlf' 


AK  NIUILIST-KESTORATIONISM. 


389 


for  ignoranoo,  for  weakness,  for  inability  to  resist  when  cir- 
cumstances were  too  strong,  but  for  wilfulness  and  obstinacy 
in  wickedness  al4ne.  So  Scripture  represents  it.  It  repre-  C 
scnts  men  perishing,  n«.t  as  destroyed  of  Satan,  or  of  adverse 
Qverpowenng  foi^ce  of  any,  kind,  but  as  ^/-destroyed ;  and 
whatever  be  the  kiystery  of  this,  and  no  one  can  pretend  a 
competence  to  explain  the  depths  of  God's  providential 
government  of  the  world,  we  niay  safely  leavb  it  to  Hihi 
Nvho  will  in  the  eU  vindicate  the  wisdom  and  goodness  of 
Ills  ways;  and  "overcome  when  He  is  judged,"  not  by 
superior  power  hni  by  truth  and  right. 

Bat  by  these  speculations  Mr.  Dunn  was  influenced  in 
h.s  i,ursu.t  of  som^,  fresh  light  that  was  to  clear  up  the 
mystery.     He  says  — 

"I  felt   tlmt  I  hui  not  yet  reached  the"  whole  truth.  .  .  t 
.ould  not  fee  sutisfie  I  that  I  had  so  far  rid  myself  of  hereditary 
prejudice,  uud  a  .sinful  fear  of  consequences,  as  to  have  estabUshed 
■mthmg  m  Imrmony  kvith  the  revealed  doctrine  that  Christ  was 
^10  Saviour  'of  the  ^rld.'  the  Second  Adam,  and  as  such  the  " 

Kodeemer  of  the  race  ihat  had  fallen  in  the  fir.st*." 

Universalism  had  already,  that  is,  got  hold  of  him,  but  tt 
lus  difficulty  was  to  r^uike  Scripture  agree  with  it.  He  was 
already  steering  his  ^ourse  towards  a  definite  point,  bent 
•  upon  Bndmg  what  he  had  decided  must  be  there  before  he 
found  it,  and  already  was  so  far  under  the  delusion  of  it  as 
to  be  confounding  the  potential  and  the  actual,  what  the 
w.ll  of  God  18  for  every  man,  witli  the  result  in  which  man's 

contrary  will  meets  Eis:  "  How  often  would  I.have  gath- 

ered  thy  children  t^fether,  even   as  a  hen  gather^th  her         . 
chickens  under  her %1ng,  W  y«  ^,0.././ ,,^,.     Behold,  your 
house  IS  left  unto.you  desolate ! "  . 

^«M^-^BunnAvontU«  for  many  long  years,'' struggling 
to  have  things  as  he  tl  ought  they  ought  to  be. 

rrl  l°r  'Tf  ^'"  "T  ^''  '  '^  "-^^"^"^^  the  words  of  the 
■Fophets  and  began,  ^r  the  first  time,  to  listen  with  purged 
ear  to  the  ^chlspermjs  "^the  emphasis  upon  the  word  is 


'^■'; 


fit 


■■'.■: 

;  '  1- 


li'     •? 

I: 


f'liJ 


890        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  riTTURE  STATE. 

"the  wJmpci'itujA,  so  to  Hpoak,  of  •  Imly  men  of  ohl  wlio  spuko  us 
they  woro  moved  by  tljo  Holy  Ghost, 'uuil  who  so  often  iincon- 
Hciously  jultlressetl  thcmHolves  to  tho.s(»  on  wlioiu  tlio  hitter  diiys 
of  the  World  should  come.  I  f^uud  in  tlu-m  much  more  than 
I  had  expected  which  seemed  to  bear  on  the  tiltimato  purposes 
of  God,  in  relation  not  to  the  Jew  only,  but  also  to  the  Gentil(! ; 
much  that  si>oke  of  restoration  in  connection  with  resurrection. 
The  first  passage  I  noticed  as  apparently  throwing  light  upon 
repeated  declarations  that  a  period  shall  como  when  truth  ftnd 
righteousness  will  bo  universal,  was  that  remarkable  portion  of 
Isaiah  (xxv.  7,  8)  in  which  the  i)rophet  declares  that  the  re- 
moval of  the 'veil  which  is  spread  overall  nations' will  take 
pLico  at  the  time  when  God  shall  'swallow  up  death  in  victory," 
and  wluni  He  sliall  '  wipe  away  tears  from  all  faces  '  —a  passaj^c 
which  is  distinctly  applied  by  the  apostle  Paiir to  the  resurrection, 
and  partially  by  John  to  the  happiness  of  the  redeemed." 

These  are  what  Mr.  Dunn  calls  "whispers,"  so  that  I 
suppose  we  are  not  to  expect  in  them  very  distinct  utter- 
ances ol"  what  lie  contends  for.  It  is  certain  tliey  are  not 
very  distinct.  For  on  the  face  of  what  Paul  says,  he  is 
speakini^  of  the  resurrection  of  "those  that  are  Christ's,  at 
His  coming,"  and  of  no  others.  If  otherwise,  then  when  lie 
speaks  of  their  being  raised  "  in  incorruption,"  "  in  power." 
"  in  glory  " — the  wicked  too  are  raised  in  this  way,  and  of* 
course  the  question  is  eternally  settled  for  all  of  them,  apnrt 
from  all  question  of  Christ  being  offered  to  them  atier- 
wards.     ' 

We  liave  always  believed  too  that  the  "  veil  spread  X)ver 
all  nations"  had  to  do  only  with  the  nations  alive  on  earth 
when  Christ  came,  and  had  nothing  to  do  with  their  resur- 
rection ;  and  that  "  God  wiping  jiway  all  tears  from  their 
eyes  "might  be  applied  to  the  happiness  of  the  redeeme<l 
without  sliowing  that  the  wicked  dead  are  among  the  re- 
deemed.    Mr.  D.  goes  on — 

"  A  second,  found  in  the  same  prophecy,  was  expressed  in 
these  words  :  '  In  that  day  shall  Israel  be  the  third  with  Egypt 
and  As.syria,  even  a  blessing  in  the  midst  of  the  land  ;  whom  the 
Lord  of  hosts  shall  bless,  saying,  Blessed  l)e  Egypt  my  poonle, 
and  Aiwyria,  the  work  of  my  hands,  nnd  Israel  mine  inheritance,' 


^:VA 


Mi£m 


K. 


ANNinir.isT-iiEsToiHTioNisa.  391 

A  Mm/appmrod  iu  EzokicI,  wUcro  tho  pro,,h„t  ,po»ks  of  Sodom 
«m  her  daugh  „r»  a«  returning  •  to  Ihoir  (orme,  c»tato,  ■  and  ^^ 
to  brad  I  ,v,ll  pvo  tl,„m  ,o  thoo  for  daugl.tcn,,  hut  ^ot  by  I  fy 
coveua,  t  tzek.  xv,  M-«l).  A/„„rt/,  ™»  found  in  J.rcL  f 
I  mil  bn..B  ag,u„  tho  captivity  of  Moul,  in  the  lattor  day ^  »  { 
further.  -I  ml  l,r.„g  again  tho  captivity  of  tho  clnUten  "f 
Ammon  «uth  tho  Lord'  (Jer.  xlvui.  47  ;  xlix.  6).  Thoro  arc 
many  other  kmJred  text,,  but  the,o,  referring  t.    tho  iZZ 

founda  fulhlment   or  that, they  „.„  do  ,o  under  tho  pL  rii^ 
K>u„«t,on.    B'B""lmga,«stateI,rael«in.ilardeckratio„.,al.„„nd 
Take  only  one  by  Ho»ca  (xiii.  U-U)  :  ■  O  We],  thou  ha„t  dt 
»t  oyed  thyself,  but  ,u  me  i.,  thy  help.     /  .„■„  „„,,„,„  ,,„„  '  ™ 
/,«/,»,«,■  <rt„^„,„,,  I, vill  redeem  them  from  death";  O  dfaZ 
I  w,U  be  thy  p  a^,e,,  O  grave,  I  wiU  bo  thy  dctructio,^  ;  roping 

m,ulc  good.     To  mo  U>  seemed  utterly  impossible  to  attach  an* 

nfonal  meann.g  to  prediction,  Uko  these,  whether  rcX-T 

GentUeor  to  Jew,  which  did  not  directly  c™.,,,„&,  the    ™p^ 

,.t,on  that  tho  persons  spoken  of  were  to  bo  annihih.ted     '^o 

Insertion  made  by  MatthewHenry  and  other,,  that  in  such  m  ! 

»gesden„„cmtu,ns  arc  applied  <«  tho  natuml  Israel,  andpTon^is 

o  the  spmtual  Isr,.el,  appeared  to  mc,  and  stUl  appears,  nZZ 

les..  Hum  a  complete  changing  of  the  prophecy."  ^ 

And  to  me  al.,o.     Nevertheles,  Mr.  Dunn  has  himself 

m,ssed  the  meaning.     The  above  passa.^-es  are  evidently  tte 

whole  strong, ,  of  his  position,  as  apart  from  ordinary  restc! 

nowTr  of  ^"^"■y.''"™  ™»'le.  had  he  not  been  under  the 

L     He    ''T"r''"""''^'  ""^^  "'■•^^'ly  '•^■'''ly  owned  to 
us.  ^He  conioundH,  as  do  a  lu,JL,umber  of  sjJilled  "  Ad- 

wUh2-'Tr' ""'  '■'"'*■""  -BtorationS  naUo,^ 
with  mdmoaat  resurrection.  ' 

Yet  in  th.it  diligent  CYan.ination  of  tho  prophets  wh'ich 
l>"  '■.■..!  for  s„  lon.g  a  time  been  .-arrying  o,,  he  nmst  hive 

'      '"'" '!).»''""■«  the  resurrection  "f  dry  bones  is  expressly 


t». 


liiiif..' 


>■  i 


r-' 


m ' 


392         FACTS  AND  TUKUUIKS  Aft  TO  A  FUTUUK  STATK. 

interpreted  in  this  way.  "  Then  ho  said  unto  mo,  Son  of 
man,  those  bones  are  the  whole  house  of  Israel.  Behold, 
they  say,  our  bones  are  dried,  and  our  hope  is  lost;  wo  aic 
cut  off  for  our  parts.  Therefore  ])roj)lK'Hy,  mid  say  unto 
them.  Thus  saith  the  Lord  God,  I>ehold,  ()  my  pi'oplc,  Hvill 
open  your  graves,  and  eau.so  you  to  conn-  up  out  of  youi 
graves,  and  bring  you  into  the  land  of  Israel.  And  ye  shall 
know  that  I  am  the  Lord,  when  Thave  o|H'ui>d  your  graves. 
O  my  people,  and  brought  you  up  out  of  your  graves,  auil 
shall  put  .my  Spirit  in  you,  and  ye  shall  live;  and  I  shall 
place  you  in  your  owji  land." 

If  Mr..  Dunn  wanted  a  passage  to  expre.ss  his  views,  he 
could  scarcely  find  one  more  suitable  cwvy  way  than  thiv 
One  might  have  imagined  it  the  very  o»ie  which  had  iu: 
nished  him  with  his  idea.  Here  is  ro!<urrection, and  conver- 
sion after  resurrection,  quite  according  to  his  thought.  Yet 
he  has  not  ventured  to  produce  this  passage  in  evi(ience,.au.l   j 

■  it  is  clearly  inapplicable  as  evidence.  It  is  a  figure^  of 
national  revival  simply,  such  an  one  as  the  chosen  peopit 
are  yet  to  know.  People  literally  dead  as  iii.lividuals  would 
not^  be  represented  as  saying^'  Our  bones  are  dried,"  etc., 
while  they  might  well  bewaj^  their  national  deatU  .so.  Tlii>  " 
way  of  speaking  is  not  uncommon  in  the  prophets,  and  1 
have  no  doubt  that^aji-<*xample  of  it  is  ioiuid  even  in  Di^n. 
xii.  2,  where  literal  resurrection  is  more  g()nerally  believed 
to  be  in  question,  but  where  the  contradiction  to  any  view 
of  literal  resurrection  is  absolutely  prohibitory  to  the 
thought.  It  is  not  a  general  resurrection  (a  thing  moreover 
found  nowhere  else  in  Scripture),  for  it  would  not  in  that 
case  be  ''Many  of  them  that  sleep  in  the  dust  of  the  earth.' 

"Nlowever  numerous  the  "  many,"  they  cannot  be  all  the  dead. 
Again,  it' is  not  the  first  resurrection,  for  some  awake  "to 
shame  and  everlasting  contempt."  Nor  ia^  it  the  resurrec- 
tion ofjudgmenVli^r  the  n;a?on  that  others  awake  "  to  ever- 
lasting life."  And  the  rendering  some  would  propose, 
"these  (who  k\fake)  to  everlasting  life;  but  those  (who ^ 
continue,  asleep)  are  for  shame  and  everlasting  contempt,'* 


AXXnilLisT-UKSTOUATlOKiaM. 


is  an   iimdinissilile   re/iJoplinr   t«   ,,  » 

«.l.  .1...  ,.a...,al'.     ,V    ,^J,-^."-    '""■n'-."-.!  i...«,o,.r.Iu„„„ 

imt.onul  revnal  ol"  Israel   thoro  will  bu   11,^0.'..  I 

It  will  not    1,0  l.lossi.,..  to  ^11  hn,    '-a       ^'''^^  "^  '*"'"*'• 

aMcrtoa  as  U>  Israel  in  the  stron.j;  t..!;  '"   """^  ^^^^^ 

Again  ,n  Lsa.  xwi.  i:,-ir,, ,, ,.  have  a  similar  figure  •  "Thou 

hast  uicieaseJ  the  nation  O  I  m-.l   Ti        i         •  " 

nation  :  Thou .t.t  .^lorlfiei    T.        i  '""''  '""''"^^^  ^^« 

ail  the  ends  ol  the  e-iiili      T ....  i    •    .       .  .     .  "°'** 

uiuiccaith.     i^<>r«l,  nitroubethevhave  visif^J 
lliee,  they  jM.urcl   out  a  prayer  when  Tl.v    l     ^  ^ 
•'I'on   then..  .  .  Thy  <lea.     nh- II  I  v        ^ ''>^/'''f  ^^'»'»S  was 

they  shall  arise."  ^  '  '"  *    ^^^  ^^'*^  body, 

up,  and  wc  shall  live  i„  Hi,  si,,,,,  ■,       ''"^  ""  *'"  '<"^  <« 

.t,  it  clashes  with  ma„y  .Scriptur^       And  thn  """"' 

applies  to  the   restcatio.  Ld  tvitl  o^  or"  "'""'' 
w  icrc  the  imaw  nC  ..,  .•    •■."""  "'  "thef  nations, 

Moaband  aZ;;!— ;;™  ■;  ""'  ""-ve.  used' 
revive,  whether  y,;  aJZT.ryTtt"^  undoubtedly  to 

""^"e  .news  w^ean  and  w?;,l:^:.Stir.^ 


I; 


:f 


in. 


PI 


I,    1 


;    J' 


nW 


J)9i        PA(TH  ASfL)  TyPOHIKS  AS  TO  A  FUTinii:  HTATE. 


^. 


will  liriii|{  Ibrtii  in  HiM  own  tiiiut  lUe  tribcH  of  KphralriL 
now  HO  vainly  bcin<>;  HcarduMt  lor.  On  thu  olhor  imm 
Kdoni  :ui«l  Huhylon  lio  unilt>r  irrcvcrHilih!  doom.  In  all  tli 
liioru  Ih  no  ilitlioulty  with  (xo*!;  und  even  uh  tu  8odom,yK-«i 
have  no  proof  of  the  race  being  ntterly  extinguiNhed  wIumi 
judgment  fell  upon  the  guilty  city.  TIiuh  there  is  no  im- 
possibility in  restoration,  without  bringing  up  from  the  grave 
the  people  dentroyed  then.  In  KU[>poHing  the  latter,  Mr. 
Dunn  has  been  listening  to  the  reasonings  of  his  own  mind, 
and  not  to  (he  "  whispt  rings"  of  the  prophet.s. 

lli.s  further  te.vts  are  'M^y  those  appealed  (o  by  llni- 
versaliMts  of  every  elass.  I'atH  being  '•  more  tolyrablo  for 
Sonlom  in  the  <lay  of  judgment "  than  for  Capernaum,  he 

,  found  it  ditHeult  to  reeoncile  M  ith  the  annihilation  of  either. 
lie  quotes  the  Lord's  words,  "  I,  if  I  be  litled  up  from  the 
earth,  will  draw  alt  uuji  unto  me, '  which  will  be  <puto  true 

'^  of  that  future  condition  of  thy  earth,  when  the  "prince  of 

^^liis  world  shall"  (according  to  what  He  fiiyn  in  immediate 
connection  with  this)  "beca.st  out'"  (John  ^^kjHi'^'^))  hut 
has  no  reference  to  those  dvhig  in  their  tiinsi(|Byiht£i^rs  to 
what  Christ  also  says,  whefP''  He  bids  thei|tiUHHSj|^//^'//- 
heaiooih/  FnUier  in  forgiving  their  enemies,^^WorTf  tinu' 

(only,  but  i'rom  the  heart,  and  therefore  forever;    not  for 

,  j^^^lu  oflences  only,  but  ibr  oil;  not  '  seven  times  '  merely, 

twpfcife^tj^tinies  seven  ' :  "  wo^ds  w hich  he  misquotes  and 

'"^'^PBS^^^i^'^*'^"**^'^*^^^^^'^^^"'^  ^^  ^"*'^'  *  princij)le  there 

^^iP^HI^^r    ^y  ^CiKi^^"^^'"^  '  ^^  ^'^  ^^^  any.*^ 
,     B^^^Ktfs  also  l^ufs  words :    ''  As  by  one  man's  dis- 

obetlience  tJie  tiuoiy  were  made  sinners,  so  by  the  obedience 
ot  one  shall  Mc  uia.ty  be  made  righteous,"  where  he  accu- 
rately enough  puts  "  tlm  many"  instead  of  '^  many'.' ;  but  in- 
accurately retains"  one  "  instead  of  "  Ute  one."  It  is  plain 
that  that  indeed  spoils  the  argument  lie  would  draw  from 
this:  for  if"  the  many,"  in  that  definite  way,  must  mean  the 
same  people  in  each  case,  then  "  the  one,"  by  the  same  rule, 
must  mean  the  same  particular  one,  which  we  know  it  does 
not 


•  ,^- 


5™gra» 


IjB  TI^tT. 


ANNiniLLST-RKaTOKATlONLSM. 


'  »oMi„arily  annlv  tl,„    ,,,„  ,  ''""'<''  '«  "  «ro«l.an  "  a.  we 
into  "the  in„.,y  ,;f     ,    ;!v!'  '  "f  ."'.•''T'' '""  "*"  '"' 

viii.  Mu.«,  „:;;:  :::  .r:,;n;;"^^r'«"'  "■  «'-y  (•»-.."• 

Knot  "iM  r,.|ati.,„  ..,  man  .  ™       k"        l  r;"""  •'■''r^''^ 
"*,     nt  IS  a  captive  not  by  any  choice  of  his  own  "  (C.r  i. 
IS  alfts,  a  willin.r  rai.tivc.)  •  if  i Af m  n     ,  -         ^'""^  **' 

-inngi,   ,„u  l,y  .eason  of  r.i.  ^l^',!  '  ~; ,' ""» 
same  i/i  /lo/tfi."  «'"'.)<  ctofl  the^ 

o,nZ.:  '^I""""'  '"  '■•"•"  "■"'l'""-  lH-arin»  ••  with; 

^■4ck  to  th.  only ,",  1  !f ;  ■?.  -r "';:'  ^"  "^""^  ^ «'«"' 

tu/T     I  the  masses  of  mankind  ? '     The  p,Lc.„ 

fa.  hfi.  say,ng,  n„,l  worthy  of  all  acceptation.  Al?6  t^it 

Here  was   'M.  !  ,    ,  ,     ^^'"^^'  «"mraand  and  teach.' 

U.ve7ZT  ''"'""'"'"  '"^™  ">"•  ""-l  "-at  it  is  rather  be- 
,         a^cu  lo  DC    nqu,    m  the  present  time,  and  ' 


■«■ —   — 


/ 


1  a 


«■ 


tS> 


'?-■ 


\l'    ■- 


( 


V;-  1""  0'''  '  ■    - 


u,.. 


/"/V 


,?^-C..^  ,N 


f) 


I      \ 


I      K 


■fv 


V  ' 


ii;. 


396 


rA.CTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


not  beyond  the  grave.  Indeed  if  Christ  be  >/ow  "  the 
Saviour  of  all  men,"  as  in  a  sense  He  is,  it  does  not  follow 
that  He  will  be  that  finally  for  such  as  now  reject  Him,  and 
it  is  often  threatened  that  He  will  not  be.  But  then  Mr. 
Dunn's  proof  is  nowhere. 

He  goes  op  to  connect  this  with  what  he  presently  found 
as  to  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  here  (as  We  have  noticed) 
he  presents  much  that  is  really  Scriptural.     But  even  here 
he  is,  as  natural,  too  much  engrossed  with  one  aspect  of 
future  blessedness  in  which  every  other  is  merged.     I  may 
not  pause  to  point  out  where  he  fails,  however.     It  iif^uitc 
true  on  the  other  hand  that,  the  saints  saved  now  are  "to 
'.sit  on  thrones';  to  'judge  others  ';  to  *  reign  oh  the  earth'; 
to  be  *  priests '  as  well  as  '  kings ' ;  to  rule  .some 'Mith  a  rod 
of  iron.' "     No  part  of  this  is  new  to  believers  in  the  Lord's 
pre-|nillennial  advent.     It  seems  to  have  been  new  to^Mr. 
Dunn;  and  so  to  have  encouraged  him  to  believe  that  hero 
he  had  found  what  he  wanted  for  the  perfecting  of  his  idear 
"May  it  no£  then,"  this- kingdom,  he  asks  him'selllSl'be  the 
-  appointed  .^pncy  for  bringing  about  the  firial  triumph  of 
the  Redeemer  by  placing  the  myriads  who  here  live  and  die 
without  light,  without  training,  T  might  almost  say  without 
probation,  under  perfect  govorjiment  and  infallible  teach- 
ing ?  "    He  notices  then  that  there  are  '  nations  "  represented 
as  outside  the  New  Jerusalem,  '"who  are  said  to  be  in  pro- 
cess of  healing  by  the  leaves  of  a  mystic  tree,  growing  by 
the  pure  '  river  of  water  of  life  '  that  proceeds  '  out  of^the 
throne  of  God  and  of  the   Lamb;'"  and  these  « nations" 
he  assumes  to  include,  of  course,  those  of  whom  his  thoughts 
are  full,  the  unsaved  dead  of  alleges  and  generations. 

This  closes  the  argument  of  his  letter,  in  which  it  is  in- 
teresting and  sad  to  trace  how  the  prepossession  with  one 
fixed  thought  led  an  intelligent  man  to  find  in  Sf-ripture  just 
that  thought  which  prepossessed  him.  It  is  tot^hlng  too, 
and  a  matter  of  hopefulness,  to  note  how  doubtfully  l^e  has 
yet  to  speak.  «  That  mnch  is  pot  said  regarding  this  possir 
ble,  or  rather  probable,  field  of  future  usefulness,^'  for  the 


!  STATE. 

be  now  "  the 
oes  not  follow 
eject  Him,  and 

But  then  Mr. 

►resently  found 
have  noticed) 
[3ut  even  here 
one  aspect  of 
jrged.     I  may 
■r.     It  ii?" quiff 
now  are  "to 
oh  the  earth'; 
«c' '  with  a  rod 
I  in  the  Lord's 
a  new  to^  Mr. 
ievethat  here 
ig  of  his  idear 
nselljgl'be  the 
il  triumph  of 
■e  live  and  die 
t  say  without 
fallible  teaeh- 
"  represented 
to  be  in  pro- 
e,  growing  by 
s ' out  of  the 
?se  "  nations  " 
I  his  thoughts 
•ations. 
<^hich  it  is  in- 
iion  with  one 
^fripturejust 
:ou(hing  too, 
tfully  he  has 
ng  this  possir 
ess,"'  for  the 


[•  '^E   RKSTITUTIOX  OF  ALL  THINGS."  397 

heirs  Of  thiskiAgdom,hesays, ''need  not  ekcito  our  wonder  " 
The  thmgshe  speaks  of  are,  at  the  most,  "  probable."  ^^ 
,/  the,  are  no,  true  ?  There  is  no  ''  full  assurance  of  flh^» 
or  "of  understanding"   hero      With    \U    rt  •      .        . 

"Mr.  Dunn's  tkeor^^     And  thrafto,         ^^"•°'  *«^'  ^^  i« 
*    1         1.  ,       •'^  "^  alter  \-ears  and  vears  nf 

study,  a  hope  that  ,na,j  make  ashamed  is  the  «oIe  reLT      ■ 
The  false  pnneiple  of  this  interpretation  of  sjpt"  e  ha, 

'or::i™t^"^S.1:rvt^rh"^r^^ 
tHe.  out.  With  Hs''^:d:;irt,fe^irh™^^^^^^^^ 


^JiW" 


CHAPTER  XXXIX 

"THE  BESTITUTION  OF  ALL  THIXGS.'^MR.  ^tJITES.  '  ; 

This   Scriptural   expression    is   the   titln  Air    t  i      \ 

o    •  .  .  propose  now  to  take  uri  and  nnrsno  i.,i.u 

Scripture   th?  thread' of  its  arm,ment       """  P"^"'^  .^'th ' 

already  looked  at,  and  of  coase™Tnol',„„f"f  ^-    ^^'^ 
there  i.  much  needed  yet  to  e:m;^,:Ltr':l:y''''''''-  ""' 

its  "testimony,"    TW,  XHxu^    .'.'  ''"'°"''  ^^^■''™  "P™ 
contradictory     Not  on'lv  U  th^      '    ,*'''"'"  ""  «^''  «%■<' 

with  its  good  news  for  every  one-  \TZ2      1  ""^^^ 
direct  statements  as  to  the  rlX'of  tie?      J- '.'■'''  ""^ 
»;ght  a.e  apparently  irrcooncllaMer  H  Tddlr,  fi^?"'      • 
all  the  texts,  or-  some  of  those  whieh  .1.1   ^         ^*  °* 
tahment,  and  owns  as  to  them  "  Wo  J  ,^  n  "*'"""  P""" 
stronger,"  but  he  adds :-  ^"'^''^  """''t  "°t  well  b.^         


398 


FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


1 1''     i; 


"The  difflcaltyis  that  aU  this  is  but  one  side  of  Scriptaw 

FoMnstance,  there  are  first  the  wunis  of  God  Himself,  repeated 
agajn  and  again  by  those  same  apostles  whom  I  have  ja  t^t^d 
that  -m  Abraham's  ,eed  all  the  kindreds  „f  the  earth  shTbe 
blessed  ;•  words  which  St.  Peter  expounds  to  molT  hit  ^c^ 
shaU  be  a  resftubon  of  aU  things, '  addmg  that  •  God  hath  spoken 
of  Uus  by  tCe  mouth  of  all  His  holy  prophets  sinee  the  wi  d 


began.'" 

Let  us  look  a  moment  at  these  texts  ere  wo  pa.,s  on,  and 
ask  ourselves  how  far  they  conflict  oven  seemingly  with 
e  emal  pun.shment     Few  wouhl  imagine  j^rhaps  that  the 
blessmg  m  Abraham's  seed  to  all  kindred.,  „f  the  oartl.  did 
that     And   by   the   very  fact  that  all  the  prophets  have 
spoken  of  the  "  restitution  of  alL  things,"  it'is  plainly  no 
■what  Mr.  Jukes  would  imply.     Moreover  this  "  restitution  '• 
«  of  (A».,y.,  not  persons,  and  (according  to  what  we  have 
seen  to  be  the  scope  of  that  Old  Testament  to  which  of 
course  the  apostle  refers),  it  is  upon  earlk,-a„,l  nowhere 
else.       Restitution  of  all  (the)  thihgs  of  which  the  prophets 
have  spoken"  is  the  true  force  of  the  word,-  anTnot  a 
restitution  of  the  universe,  as  .Mr.  Jukes  seems  to  imagine 

''St.  Paul  further  declares,"  he  gocsU  to.say,  '■  this  wondrous 
■mysW  of  God's  will,  that  He  hath  purp^osed  in  b£2S 
^ordmg  to  His  good  plea.,„re,  to  rehead  and  reconciled  o 
ttmself  m  and  by  Christ,  all  things,  whether  they  be  thing^^  n 
heaven  that  .s,  the  spirit  world,  where  the  eonflk  with  IC 
yet  js.,.or  thihgs  on  earth,'  that  is,  this  outward  worM,  ^^ 
death  now  reigns,  and  where  even  God's  elect  are  by  natut 
children  of  wrath,  even  as  other  men."  j    »rare 

But  this  goes  no  further  than  heaven  and  earth,  and  does 
not  say  one_word  about  Allen^ngels  or  lost  men;  they  will 
be  outside  the  scene  here  spoken  of  Heavenly  thin^  as 
well  ^earthly  are  said  in  Scripture  to  be  "purchi^d," 
J:!52?£!!?^i:::i!^!f^fil>mfi^  been  L 

'WO,  as  ,f  to  get  nd  of  this  ^V,  „nrt  imerpret«l  a.  if  It  were  ,),. — 


STATE. 

)  of  Scripture, 
ierent  doctrine, 
aiself,  repeated 
vo  just  quoted, 
etirth  shall  be 
can  that  there 
od  hath  spoken 
inco  the  world 

pass  on,  and  ''-  -'-^l 
sraingly  with 
laps  that  the 
the  eartii  did 
rophets  have 
s  plainly  not 
*  restitution  " 
hat  we  have 
to  which,  of 
md  nowhere 
the  prophets 
,*  and  not  a 
^o  imagine. 

-lys  wondrous 
in  Himself 
!concile  unto 
be  things  iu 
t  with  Satan 
world,  where 
re  by  nature 

;h,  and  does 
i;  they  will 
y  things  as 
purchased," 
ing  been  in 

'-o?  (Acts  Hi. 
e  sentence  in 
-e-^. — 


"TnEUESTITUTIONOF   ALLTlilNOS."  399 

^"ll^T^  ''  '"''•  ^  -"^P--onofthe  passages  will 
shou  that  they  cannot  "apply  to  those  to  who.u  mT]!^ 
would  apply  them.     In  Hob.  ix.  i>l-.>.i  n..  Z  ,        ^ 

the  vesspk  i^f  thr.  .  •  "  '  ^"^  ia»>«"iacle  and 

lut  vesseib  ot  the  sanctuarv  SDrinll^.,!  ,t,*i    *i      ii      , 

which  the  apostle  internro^ 'f  /.  7       ^^'"^  ^^"''^^^  ^"^1 

pos«e.,io»to  bcredeemea.  And  i .  C.^  1,  ■  o  in'T 
.,way,M%.v  are  spoken  of,  not  ,,e™, ';,'''''' "'""' 
eUed  bein«  „.,„e!,  .,„.,,  I,',  .^o';' ,  ;:^;r""LT''• 
to  reconcile  all  M,„,.,  u„to  Himself-  l.v  ?•  i  '  ^  "' 
*e,  .e;tl,in,.  „,.  ea'nl,  o-  >l::::l:  ^''  '^^^'..-'-^J 
a.t,„„  to  this_",v„„  ,,„„,  „„  reconcilca-  T„  ~  ," 
these  passages  is  hell  named  or  by  anHos  Lr,  T".  f 
'^Fmfiu...  "1  r  "^  •'">  possibility  included. 

now  groans  »,„uT„l„vi,S7i::T""'  i""  "'"'*'"''■  '■''-'' 

into  the  glories  u^^y  oi u!^ ^iz"::^^::^?^ '"  "'"■"'■°" 

But  this  we  have  seen  to  ho  f  J...  i^ 
•  even  man;  and  the  dc  "vera  1    ","';  "''"'"■■"'■ ''""'  ""' 
"the  redemption  ofile  bo    ■"  "t  H  't""  ■■"  "'"  "'"«  "^ 
thousan-d  yL  betbre^he  j    iml  ':i::^;-''r«-.» 

It  .s  a  mere  strain  of  the  "all  ereatio,  "    ,      "'"'"«  <""^- 
read  it  with  the  context.     Again-     "       '"'P»''s,ble  if  we 

"In  another  place  he  deol'iro«  fl.of  r<    i 
l..gt).e  worM'nnto  Him.^lf    •  O'^'^^m  Christ  reconeU- 

True  but  they  refused  and  rejected  if  ,n1 
■ng  the  "  n,inistry  of  reconciliat  X'!'  ^11^:^;'''''- 
s.on,  in  His  absence,  has  been  perpetuated         ^"^''^  -- 

tlic  devil  ;•••_       /^^""""""''"Poworof  death,  that  is, 

oftitr;:::'!^,- :s.^«'---—h„  th^ib  fear"'- 

fi,^fl    .  7    f  ^"^*»eir  lifetime  subject  to  bondir-P ''     Tf  • 
*^e^«rsMeatha.ristI^ 


-J.  J, 


W: 


IFi/ 


'&: 


400 


FACTS  AND  THKORIKS  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATB. 


•  ght   through     he   gospel  "(  o  Tim.  i.    10).     For   whom  v 
l^or  those  who  .lo  n<.t  receive,  the  gos,H.|  "^     A,„l  )JZ     ' 

'      j«„*i    '  '-'"Airtt  ,     lu.ii     US  sin   hath  reioTied   iinf/> 

sm  aboanded,  gmee  did  „,„el,  more  „b,„„,d  •  ".^     '     "'   ^^"^ 

^ce  and  of  the  git  of  nghteou»nes8,"  and  by  implication 
as  oerta»ly^  .A.,.  ,„/,„  <fo  „„,    The  „istakl  crmonly 

funding  of  grace  a  matter  of  krcaM,  instead  of  /iei,M 
But  from  tho-nature  of  the  case,  if  it  were  a  question  of  the 
.umber  reached,  there  could  be  no  .--.-abounding  of  gra^ 
fell  «"&"  "','""'  ""-'"'"='""  ""-ShChrist'tran 
atall.  But  ho  real  matter  is  one  of  depth  and  height  and 
»ot  of  breadth,  as  I  have  said.  0,.e  offeiee  brings  condem 
nation;  the  free  gift  isof,„„„^„ftfe„eos  to  justified  ion    T 

eLs  b^fr  ''"'  ■^"^""''  ''^■'™  righteousness  not /^ 
reign  but  they  ™y«  i„  uj;,  ^s  to  number,  it  is  on  each 
side  "the  one-  and  "the  many:  the  first  Adam  ^d  the 
many  connected  with  bin,,  ,he  ••  last  Adam  "  and  trianv 
connected  ,vith  him,  with  a  difterence  only  i„  the  18th  veS 
where  the  tendency  ",«««?,  »„,„«„"  f,  i„  contrast  wTh 
^^eaotuaUssnem^he  19th.t  >  contrast  with 

*  Rom.  V.  li-*^!  ~~~~  ^ ■        ■■ 


"TIIK    Ri:STITUTIOX   OF   ALL  Till XOS."  401 

Mr.  Jukes  got'8  on : — 

•'  To  auc.tlu.r  chmch  lu-  .tute.  tho'same  doctriuo,  ilutt  '  aH  in 
.  A.Um  all  dus  ovoM  s..  in  Clirust  .sluill  all  1..,  mad.,,  ulivr '  •  and 
timt  '  the  end  '  ,sl,all  not  co.ue  '  till  all  are  subject  1„  Him,'  th.t  .^ 
'God  may  be  '  not  all  in  scmo  but  '  ;dl  in  all  ;  for  Ho  must  ivigu 
till  He  hath  p,it  all  onourios  nn.lor  His  feet ;  the  last  enemy  that 
slmll  be  destroyed  is  death.'"* 

This  save  the  fn-st  passa^re,  we  have  already  had  before 
us.     Throughout  the  chapter  the  resurrection  spoken  of  is 
the  "  resurrection  of  the  just, '  and  it  is  only  that,  or  those 
t!.at  are  "  in  Christ."     As  all  these  die  in  Adam,  they  all  are 
^    made  alive  m  Christ :  the  "  all  •  are  defined  bv  the  eonnec- 
tiou  with  the  previous  verses  to  be'all  "  those  that  .s/.v;>,'and 
o   whom  Christ  ''  is  tiie  first-fruits.  •     They  are  the  ju^  only. 
It  1^  defaned  by  the  connection  with  tlie  verses  followincr  to 
be  all  -  those  that  are   Christ  "s  "  :  «'  Christ  the  first-thms  • 
afterward  they  that  are  Christ's  at  His  comin^r."     Xor  does 
the  apostle  say  one  word  about  the  wicked  at^all 
Again  Christ  rei.^ns  till  He  pufs  all  enemies  under  His 

Wh      ?!,      -^''"^  ''''""  '^  *''''"*^'  ''  ^^'^  -"''y  ^n^V^^'^'o  to  this. 
When  this  IS  accomplished  He  gives  up  the  kingdom,  and 
there  are  still  enemies,  though  «  under  His  feet."     God  can 
not  be  all  in  all  then,  in  the  sense  Mr.  Jukes  would  assume. 
Ihe  connection   in   the,  text,  moreover,  .loes   not  .rive   his 
bought  at  all.     For  if  Christs  enemies  'had  bec;m:  i^ 'end 
before  He  gave  up  the  kingdom,  ILs  giving  if.  np  .oouU  not 
make  God  all  in  their  luarts  cunj  ,nore  thai  Ure.     But  i 
«  the  gurmg  up  of  the  kingdom  that  makes  God  "  all  in  all  " 
Evidently  then  the  sense  is  that  He  wUl  be  in  recognized 

and  2my>icf/ice^^  supremacy  everywhere. 
But  he  goes  on: — 

W,f?  ''"  T-  "8™.  'Bleesed  be  tho  God  and  Father  o£  o„r 
Lord  Jea,«  Ctat,  who  hath  ble»«l  „,  with  all  Hj.iritual  blesxin", 

imnessof  times  He  might  gather  together  in  oueaU  tilings  iu 


*  1  Cor.  XV.  22-28. 


■"I 


402 


\ 


FACTS  AND  THE0B1E8  AS  TO  A  PUTtJRE  STATE. 


'1 


I^J.  bo«.  which  are  in  heaven  and  which  are  on  earth,  even 

—  ■  * 

This  k  a  text  Mr.  Jukes  has  already  onde  given  who 

rauslatca"  gather  together  io  one  »  as  "  rehta,!."    1  "ee; 
.amly  puts  .t*  anew  connection,  by  dropping  six  v^™ , 

H"rn^tVrS"il'™'^'A'^-    ^ 

L^lV^n      ?«  °™'^ '°"'^""''"'"  """""^  that  Josus  Christ  it 
both  ±a  a„"f  "^  "'  ,*^.  "">  ^''"'''  ' "  '"  «°  tWs  end  Chri 

ii^^^:a'iw^:^'^"'^''  "■•"  ="  '^^'"  "f  f-'"  fcoth  ^ 

Cllfst'?  """  ''k'  "'■""""'y  '""'"™'*  f-O''  "^'^e-     For 
Chnst  s  enemies  be.ng  put  under  His  feet  imphes  thM  they 

own  H,m  Wd;  and  that  they  find  Him,  o/loolc  to  Him  a^ 
haviour,  18  only  said  by^r.  Jukes.  •  ' 

'■  He  further  declares  tljat  '  for  thi.5  <mVo  l,„  ..,«■  . 

W'  anlTV^r  .r  ''^"««^  for  all,  to  be  testified  inX 

Irn.;  lf^         '^'  "^'^  H  ^"'^  ^^"^^'^'i-d  ^1  in  unbelief  tS 
.  He  mi«ht  have  mercy  ubon  all.'  "|  '^""fuei,  mat 

Mr^jXI?";  'r""   ""'"  '"'''  ^^  ''»™  ="«»  looked  at. 
Mr.  Jukes  unites  thep  together  after  his  own  fashion  omit 

tmg  or  supplementing  as  suits  his  argument.    Th^'inTh . 

befor      and  suffer  reproaeh,  because  we  trust  in  the  livin" 
God^_etcvrords_,v^showus  the  connection  with  God 

'  *  Eph.  i.  3-10.    .         '     .  ~        ' — ■ ■ 

t  "  Things  "  is  not  expressed  here  in  Ufa  Greek     It  r«a^a  «    r , 
enly,,earthly.  and  infernal  [beinasj  "    ^ColT^.^T''^^'"''"' 
isrrfa-arVror.  I  «'n»sj.      m  tol.i.  20  on  the  contrary  it 

tPhil.  ii.  10.11;  Rom.  xiv.  9.         '^ 
H  Tim/iv.  10:  ii.  !_/; 


Rom. 


xi.  32. 


-N  :-    — 


,'*• ; 


/'THE  BJiSTITOIlON  OF  ALL  THINGS." 


K^3 


"   K*  f  f  T'  ■  ■  ""'"'"'''"y  '"'''">««  "'ho  believe,  so  that 
m  the  facf  of  per,ee»tio„,  etc.,  he  could  labor.     aJ„  ht 

r  :;:  if  "■"^f  ™S»-  -  -on  «,  prayerl-  should  bflde 
^'L  ^  J"'™  '™'"''^  «™  ™r.,«,  apart  and  in 

exhort  therefore,  that,  first  of  all,  suppl  cation     p™;er, 
mtercessJ>ns,  and  giving  of  thanks  be  made  for  all  me7  f"; 
kmgs  an,    for  all  that  are  in  authority,  ,/,„,  „„  „,  " t;  j° 
puaa,uir^aceub/^Pfei„  all  go^li,,,,  and  honesty    for  hi 

o7  tht  tr,:r;r  thriiTGrd  ™T '"  t'<"-''«'^«'' 

.ween  Uod  »d  men,''i:  ^ cS  rel::HSt:  Hit 
self  a  ransom  for  all  to  h^  to..f:fl    i  •      j        .       ^  ™' 

,.ho  whoi.  passai"  ^-^^r- rii^M^rs;  i™r 

,ot    nadtetimeye,!  Income;  whereas  the  apostle's  words 
wh.ch  arj  hterally  "  .ho  gave  Himself  a  XZ  {Tm 

bis    b"a°Th         "^  "^^  "'"^'"  ''^  -  °^-»  -nvtj 
h.s    but  k  the  sentence  that  follows  the  very  opposite 
whereon  o  I  am  ordained  a  preacher."  etc.  ^^         ' 

As  for  the  last  text  quoted,  it  is  an  entirely  differed  on,> 

now  not  helved  in  yojX.-JZZXtZ:^ 
that  they  aU  may  be  objects  of  mercy  t    For  r!jTl\ 

""tt"  '"\  «"«  "P  together)  air  7unbfiref  ttt  H 
m^t  have  niercy  upon  all."    The  Jews  refu   „g  TL^t 
wh.chnook  «p  Gentiles,  lost  all  claim  upon  G„5  and  be 

mercy.     But  thus  God  coujd  show  mercy  to  them   «.hen  it 
was  demonstrated  to  be  merely  that.     tL  mercy  I  to  h' 


-1^ 


ro  uocprvpioy  naipoiS  iSiois. 


VT03., 


■cvr.i  d^"'  —  '"^^O-  ^^  v,.re,.  iu.^  Wa^i 


-*. 


si 


li:; 


In-' 
1  -11 


404         FACTS  AND  TIIKOKIES  AS  T.»  A  FUTLliE  STATE. 


nation  as  such.     The  words  have  m)t lung  to  do  with  uniyer. 
sal  restoration.  »         * 

It  ^^'-  •^"'^^^  t"''"''  no^^  from  Faul's  testimony  to  John's  •-, 

tl  .t  '  th.  Fu  iH.r  s..„t  the  S.m  to  he  the  Saviour  of  the  world  ' '• 
for  God  sent  not  Ih.s  Sou  into  tho  vorld  to  .un.h.mu  the  world' 
but  that  the  world  through  Him  might  l)o  .savvd. '  " 

But  why  not  go  on  to  the  ne.vt  verse,  which  assures  us 
of  how  alone  this  could  be  realized  :  "  he  that  beiieveth  on 
Uim  IS  not  condemned  ;  but  he  that  beiieveth  not  is  con 
demned  already  because  he  hath  not  believed  on  the  name  of 
the  only  begotten  Soil  of  God/-* 

" Further  he  teaches  that  tlu-  only  begotten  Son  'is  the  pro 
pitiation  not  for  our  sins  only,  In.t  for  the  siu.s  of  the  whole 
wor  a  ;  that  He  •  is  the  La.n!,  of  G-.l  whieh  taketh  away  the  sin 
of  the  worid,  and  '  was  revealed  for  this  very  purpose,  that  He 
might  destroy  the  works  of  the  d.vi) ' ;  aUd  thaVas  a  result 
there  shall  be  no  more  deatli,  nor  scrrow.  nor  pain,  because  ali 
things  arc-  made  new,  and  the  former  things  arypussed  away.'  "f 
11  ^^''''^  ^''»»'"  various  and  <li,seonnccted  texts  are  brou<rht 

together.     No  one.  I/should  trust,  that  believes  in  Chdst 
-doubts  His  boing  the  world's  Saviour,  but  what  is  more  than 
doubted  IS  II.s  being  the  actual  salvation  of  those  who  refuse 
Him      And   if  Flis  being   a  'propitiation   forj  the   whole 
world,  means  that  all  will  l,e  saved  by  it,  how  is  this  toV 
reconciled  with  the  fact  that  for  some  there  "remainethno 
more  sacriHee  fi5r  sins"?     Again  Christ's  taking  aw^iy  the 
sm  of  the  worn  will  yet  l,e  displayed,  as  Mr.  Jukes  ricrhtly 

foresees,' when  in  the  new  earth  it  and  all  its  consequence' 
death,  sorrow  and  pain,  are  passed  awav  forever.  But  Jthat 
fis  stnetly  in  the  new  heavens  and  earth,  wherein  dwelleth 
righteousness,  and  :Mr.  Jukes  cannot  make  thjlt  lan-ua-e 
apply  to  hell.  \         '^     '=' 

^  While  as  to  the  devil's  works,  as  f  hye  befbr^said,  they 

*Johniii.  17,  T^.  "  '  ""- — - 

Rel.\'l3"''  '^  ^"'"  '  ''"  ''''•'"'   ''*  ^^"  ^^'-   '-'-'-^^  ««« 

t  "  TI.0  sins  of,"  .,,o„!,l  l,o  omitfo,!.  mv  i.  ^voll  known.    ' 


4.  5  ;  and  see 


"THE  RESTITUTION   OF  ALL  TIIINOS."'^  405 

may  be  undone,  and  man  even  loosed,  from  his  bonda-c  in 
this  respect  and  yet  share  through  his  oNvn  will  the  devil's 
portion.  The  lake  of  fire  is  not  the  devil's  work;  it  is  his 
punishment.  '  ^    . 

Finally  Mr.  Jukes  adduces  :— 
,    ;    ":^)r  'the  Father  lovcth  the  Son,  and  hath 'given  aU  things 
into  His  hand'  :  and  the  Son  Himself  declares,  '  All  that  ?he 
Father  giveth  me  shall  come  to  me.  and  himthat  cometh  to  mo 
Imllmnowxseca.tout.     For  I  came  down  from  heaven,  not  "o 
do  mine  own  wiU  but  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  me.     Ami  this 
IS  the  Father's  will  which  hath  sent  me,  that  of  all  which  He  hath 
given  me  I  shcmld  lose  nothing,  but  should  raise  it  up  again  at 
the  last  day.      And  again  He  says,  '  And  I,  if  I  be  Ufted  iip  from 
the  earth,  will  draw  all  men  unto  me.'"* 

Here  again  it  should  be  no  difficult  matter  to  see  that  all 
things  being  given  into  Christ's  hand  is  a  different  thing  from 
people  being  given  to  Him  as  His  own.     And  in  that  sixth 
chapter  of  John's  gospel  f,pmi  which  Mr.  Jukes  quotes,  the 
limitation  is  so  clear  and  precise,  and  so  close  to  the  very 
place  he  quotes    that   it  seems  impossible  it   should  have 
escaped  him.     The  next  ,erse  to  his  last.but  one  rims  thus  • 
And  this  is  the  will  of  Him  that  sent  me,  that  every  one 
which  seeth  the  Son,4nd  believeth  on  Him,  may  .have  ever- 
lasting life,  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  dav."     Does 
that  apply  to  all  ?  .  Will  they  who  do  not  believe  have  ever- 
lasting life  alike  ?    Is  that  what  these  texts  point  out  '^ 
The  last  I  have  before   spoken  of.  and  need  not  return 

to  It. 

Mr.  Jukes  finds  therefore  an  "appajfnt  contradiction  "  in 
these  sayings  of  Scripture  which  the  "  appro^^e^^eabhing  of 
Christendom  "  still  leaves  an  unsolved  mystery.     Inieed  it 
must  be  confessed  his  versi.on  of  it  does  leave  much  unsolved 
but  having  given  my  own,  I  need  not  follow  it.      ^ 

"The  truth  whi'ch  solves  the  riddle,  lies,"  he  says,  "in  the 
mystery  of  the  will  of  our  ever  blessed  God  as  to  thq  process  and 
stages  of  redemption  ;— 


John  iii.  35 ;  vj.  37-30 ;  xii.  32. 


406 


I'ACTS  AND  THEOitlBS  A8  «,  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


mi  I 


•  "  (1.)  First,  His  will   l,y  some  to  bloss  and  save  otlmr*  •  "it 

"  (-•.)  Hi»  will  therofom  to  work  out  the  rod«mplio„  «f  "^  ,„., 
by  ,u,«»..vo  ag.»  or  di»poa™U„„».  or,  to  u«,  tSeL^Lt 
St  Paul     uccorchag  to  .h„  p„rp„«,  of  .Ue  «ge„  • ;  a^^!^     ^ 

life,  aciuittai,  ,„.:i  s„,;,ti„„  L  '  I  r'   .  ""r""  ■""'  ™y '"  ■ 

destroy  l,to  that  la«  th    p^wer  ofdeathTh:;  V""".«'', '!-«'  «o 

,     to  duUver  them  who  through  t.Llfi.i       '  "'  ""^  ''<'"'•  ""d 

subject  to  I,oud„«e°         '  ^       "  "'  "'™"'  '"^"''  "'"'  W«"i'>.o 

The  second  and  third  of  thcsp  Kiat..m„^»?^'  t 
wen  considered.     Wo  have  ^n  tllTe"  p^pt:  oT^ 
ages"  has  not  in  Scripture  the  n»aning  m/jTZuJ^^ 
We  have  seen  too,  that  the  death  of  ,J,f  ,„„,„r  '^  f„^- 
tion  IS  never  the  appointed  way  of  il,  salvation  ..t- 
are  opposed.     As  when  James'lays     •  h  re  tone  L 
who  is  able  to  .,„.  and  to  ,&..„,/•.  „ho  «  ^l  s„;pos?Z 
these  were  convertible  terms  after  ,N  -      .    ,  PPf'"  '"^^ 

apostle  speaks  of  Qhr ist  by  death  d„,    '  •       ,      ""'""'  "'<' 
--♦k  ^ -.      '*"*»•'  "7  aeatn  destroyinir  hitn  that  ho^i 

the  power  of  death,_it  is  by  His  o,ou  death  He  Toes  i.  and 
not  by  the  death  of  those  whom  He  se,«  free  ' 

It  is  mainly  then  his  first  propo.,ition  wo  have  to^o*.  ■  j 
now :  "  God's  purpose  by  the  first  fr,„,        <•      t      consider 

let  Mr.  Jukes  state  his  argument 

•In  thy  seed  shall  aU  thekiLd^^Us Ttrl":?.  t^M  ^"^^  ^ 


*     • 


•ORE  STATE. 


"TIIE  KESTlTimoM  OF  ALL  TIIINOS."  407 

It  .nay  b«  „.e  „r„  .,li„,!.  but  ne  .„,„•..».  „„  „.„„„t  ,<^ 

1.  -.     r«  „.  t ,..  ,a..t  .  ut  Christ  ,v,.H  I„„„  a»  Al.rahW«  «h.,1 

M«.v  ■"./»"."«.  hU-n,  ,|,r.M„l,  Ili,„  ,H  „,u.|,,  were  h„r„y 

.    Meanly    It  ,l,o«|,1  „oom  ,„/    A,„l  tl...,,  Mn.  J„w":,' : 

mcnt   ,»   vo„  .     Why   ,I„e,   he  apply  ,ho   hloasing  of  all 

km,  r..,l,  „f  ,ho  earlh  only  ,„  ,,ta,  „.„,  „„„,„  „.|,^,J;  ^,,, 

.he,  .     Jloroovor,  th,.  "  .S..„,l "  h,  «  h„„,  all  ki,„lro,lH  of  ,ho 

..artharo  ..1,0  hh.».,„.l,  is  .x,,r„«sly  „.ss.>rt,.l  by  ,he  a,„,„tU. 

Myal.  ....  lb)  to  be  Christ  j,lo„cs  an.l  „„t  true  ofothern    "be 

sa,th  «o^  An.l  l„  s..,.,ls,  as  o.-.n.a„y,  bat  as  ol'  one,  a.  ,1  to 

.  .y  "ee,I,  „.h,.h  ,»  CI,,;..."     Arj,n,men,,or,.„„,.se;is  easy 

^^^«e^uy  ,«s«n.e  the  basis  of  it  at  our  will.     Hut,  we  are' 

•   „  "  J'fl""-!'"*  fa  tl-n  rcvo„l,,l  ,vilh  full,.r  ,l,.tail  i„  th„  l„,v  „f 

md  .sha,l„w  h„I,.s  f,„,„  a„„t  the  faec  of  Mo».«.     l)„t  i„  t:h  it 
ho  ,„„•„«,  ,s  u,,v..il„,,  f„,.,,.,.r,  ,,,,.1  the  .nystorv  by  th,.  «,■.,. 1,^ 
to  save  olho,.  ,s  by  the  Holy  (ihost  n„ul,.  fully  uauifost.     Chri^ 

Hoi3fir.sUbo,.„fr„„.„„„v„,  fl„t  oat  of  lit,,,  for  Ho  isthooulV 
begotten  Sou  „f  o.,,,,  bo„otle„of  tho  FatlaT  before  all  Irf  . 
•  or  by  Hna  were  M  things  er..al,.,l,  whioh  ,»■..  in  heaven  ™,i 
wineh  ,.re  .„,  earth,  visible  an.l  invisibh.,  whether  they  l"  h™       * 

ny  H.n.  an,l  for  H.ra,  ,„,<!  Ho  i.  1„.f„re  „11  thif.gs,  „„a  by  ffira 
.11  thmgs  eousist.'    But  He  is  more  than  this,  for  He  iZ 

Hotilt  I '"•"","''■•''-■''''•'. «"'"'■'  "'  •'-'!■.  •«">'  i"aH  .iS. 

fl  stbom  from  the  ,loa,l,  that  He  is  H..a,l  of  the  olmreh,  L} 
fl.*fn„ts  of  the  ereature.    All  things  are  iu,W  of  God  ;  but 

Sme^n^^^au^^d^th,  by  man  e*n|o  also  the  resurreotion^; 
*  Mr.  Jukes  fees  nn  ibffiTonco  bctweea 


* 


can  an  '.  onlj/  begotten  "  bo  a  J!r»(  / 
t  Where  is  thi.^  taught  t 


II, St  ■'  and  ..  only."    How 


~\ 


1M^ 


lli^ 


\ 


■v^ 


408        FACTS  AMI)  TIIKOIIIKS  A8  TO  A  FUTURE  STATF:. 

of  til.'  .liiwl.'    Tliereforo  ns  by  ono  flist-born  death  cfttne  into  tin*, 
worhl,  so  I>y  unothor  flrHt-bom  hIiuII  it  bo  foroviT  ov<'rthro\vii." 

*  IJut  if  thin  bo  the  New  T«'8tanu'nt  doctrine  of  the  tirst- 
born,  :is  ho  holds  it,  Mr.  JukoH  allows  it  docs  not  prove  h'ts 
case.  V^ory  rcmarl<ablo  it  is,  after  lii8  having  told  us  just 
before,  that  "  in  Christ  the  purpose  is  unveiled  forever,  and 
the  mj^tery  by  tlu^  first -bom  to  sare  others  ia  by  the  Holy 
-<}host  nlado  fully  manifest,"  he  now  tells  us  that  neverthcr 
less  it  is  not  in  the  clear  revelations  of  the  New  Testament 
,th«t  we  are  to  find  the  unveiling  of  this  purpose,  but  we  must 
</o  hai'A-  ((>  fhe  lam  to  find  it!  "  The  la\^of  Moses  is  most 
instructive  here;  for  while  11  is  true  "that  the  letter  W"  that 
law  cannot  be  explained  but  by  the  gospel,  it  is  no  lemrue 
th(it  the  gi)spel  in  its  breadth' and  depth  caimot  be  set  forth 
but  by  the  figures  of  the  la^,  each  jot  of  which  covers  some 
blessed  mystery  "  ! 

Wo  have  usually  thought  that  the  letter  of  the  law  was 
|»lain  enough,  and  that  the  Ji^nres  were  what  the  New  Tes- 
tament explained.  On  the  contrary,  Mr.  Jukes  asserts  the 
figures  of  the  Old  Testament  alone  fully  set  forth  the  gos- 
pel of  the  New  ! 

lie  confesses  then  that  his  full  gospel  cannot  be  found  in 
what  we  style,  by  way  of  -eminence,  the  "  gospel  "  I  Let  us 
still  go  on  with  him,  however: — 

"  Wimt  then  does  the  law  teach  us  of  tlie  First-bom  from  the 
dead?.  .  .  Acc6rdiug  to  the  law,  the  first-born  had  the  right, 
though  it  might  be  lost,,,  of  being  priest  and  king,  that  is,  of  inter- 
ceding for,  and  niling  over  their  younger  brethren  ;  on  him  de- 
volved the  duty  of  Goel  or  Redeemer,  to  redeem  a  brother  who 
had  waxen  poor,  and  sold  himself  unto  a  stranger  ;  to  avenge 
liis  blood,  to  raise  Up  seed  to  the  dead,  and  to  redeem  the  inher- 
itance, if  it  were  at  any  time  lost  of  alienated.  To  sttstjdn  these 
duties  God  gave  him  a  double  portion.  Need  I  point  out  how 
Clirist  fulfils  these  particulars  ?  how,  as  first  out  of  the  grave, 
that  'barren  womb  that  cries.  Give,  give,' He  is  the  First-born 
through  whom  the  ble-ssing  reaches  its  ? — In  this  sense  no  Chris- 


tian  doubts  that  God's  purpose  is  by  the  First-born^om  the  dead 
to  save  and  bless  the  later-born." 


"TUB   KK8TITUT10N   OP   ALL  TIllKOS." 


M)\) 


ie  no  Cliris- 
Dm  tlio  (load 


The  first-bom  under  the  law  were  never  priests.  It  \h 
well  known  there  was  one  8i>ecial  family.  The  noarost  of 
kin  redeemed  the  inheritance,  etc.,  not  necessarily  the  first - 
bom.  And  Christ's  doing  this  does  not  yet  present  Mr. 
Jukes'  gospel,  but  ho  must  dig  deeper  down  to  find  it. 

"But  tho  trutb  goes  further  still,  for  thoro  nro  others  lu-Kide 
the  Lord  who  iire  both   *  flrst-born  '  and  •  AbruluunV.  seed,'  who 
must  therefon)  in  their  measure  '  shuro  this  huuuj  houin-  Vith 
and  under  Christ,  and  in  whom,  us  •  join t-heiis  with  Him,' the     ^ 
promise  must  Iks  fulfilled,  that  in  them  •nil  the  kindreds  of  the  ^     : 

enrthshftll  be  blessed.'    This  gloricms  truth,  thoUKh  of  tho,vt>n' 
essence  of  tho  gospet,  which' announces  salyiition   to  thtj  world 
through  tho  promised  •  seed  of  Abraham,' is  even  yet  so  litth' 
seen  by  many  of  Abraham's  seed,  that  not  a  few  of  the  ehiUbiu 
of  promise  speak  and  act,  as  if  Christ  and  His  body  only  should 
bo  saved,  instead  of  rejoicing  that  they  are  also  tho  appointud 
means  of  saving  others.     Even  of  tho  elect,  few  sec  that  they  ari.' 
elect  to  the  birthright,  not  to  be  blessed  only,  but  to  \n)  a  Ijlossinj,'  ;   ■'" 
as  first-bom  with  Christ  to  share  the  glory  of  kingship  and  priest- 
hood with  Him,  not  only  to  rule  and  intercede  for  tlieir  younger 
and  later-bom  brethren,  but  to  avenge  their  blood,  to   raise  »ip  " 
seed  to  the  dead,  and  in  and  through  Christ,  their  Life  and  Head, 
to  redeem  their  lost  inheritance." 

This  then  is  how  the  Old  Testament  figures  set  forth  the 
gospel   of  the  New!      But  the  blessing  of    all  nations  is 
through  the  "one  seed,"  Christ,  alojtc,  as  wo  have  seen. 
In  what  "  measure  "  then  can  others  share  in  it  y    And  what 
has  being  "joint-heirs  with  Christ,'!  to  do   with  ^^^iavhuj 
others  "  ?    What  does  avenging  the  blood  of  those  who  have 
died  for  their  sins  and  in  them  mean  ?  and  how  arc  these 
the  "later-bom"?    That  the  risea  soiftits  are  priests  and 
kings  with  Him  who  is  Priest  ftnd-lting-Ms  of  course  true, 
anH  rule  and  intercession  for  others  are  implied   iji  these 
terms.     But  over  whom  and  for  Avhom  are   these  offices?" 
"  Their  younger  and  later-born  brethren,"  says  ]\Ir.  Jukes. 
Then  these,  should  be,  and  will  bo,  doubtless,  millennial      ' 
saints.     Theytsan  hardly  b(i  the  wicked,  withoul,  we  assume         —— 
the  later  birth  (new  birth,  of  course)  of  these.     Mr.  Jukea  » 


/     • 


A 


%*' 


^ 


■-  •*. 


3*- 


410>      FACTS  AND  TIIKOUJLES  AS  TO  A  FUTUllK  STATE. 

at  present  has   at  least  given  us   no   evidence   at   all  of 
this.  ' 

lie  now  passes  on  to  the  "  first-fruits,"  rightly  referring 

the  Passover  first-fruits  to  Christ,  the  Pentecostal  leavened 

I! If  cakes  to  the  saints:    '•*  Christ,  the  First-fruits,'  and  *  we,  a 

kind  of  first-fruits  ' :  Christ  'the  First-born,'  and  we  'the 

-^  :-       church  of  the  first-bom';  words  which  carry  with  them," 

he  says,  "  blessings  unspeakable, '  for  if  the  first-fruit  be  holy, 

the  lump  is  also  holy,'  the  offering  of  the  firstrfruits  to  God 

being  accepted  as  the  sanctification  and  consecration  of  the 

^  whole  coming  harvest."  • 

Does  Mr.  Jukes  mean,  of  the  "  tares  "  as  well  as  of  the 
•  wheat,  or  of  the  wheat  alone  ?    If  the  latter,  it  will  not  bo 
*         questioned ;  but  neither  will  it  serve  his  turn,     lie  seeks  to 
apply  it  thus: — 

'*  First,  the  Jew  is  Abraham's  seed, — the  people  that  dwell 
alone,  and  are  not  reckoned  among  the  nations,  and  althougli 
'all  are  not  Israel,  who  are  of  Israel,'  Scripture  willindeed  be 
-broken,  if  Israel  is  not  again  grafted  in;  when,  if  the  casting 
away  of  them  has  been  the  riches  of  the  world,  the  receiving  of 
.  them,  as  St.  Paul  says,  shall  be  life  from  the  dead.  'Israel  is 
my  son,  my  first-born,  saith  the  Lord.'  All  4iatious  therefore, 
shall  yet  be  blessed  in  them, " 

Here  again  is  the  constant  twist,  the  many  seeds  substi- 
tuted for  the  one.  And  while  Israel  will  be  fruitful  in  the 
earth,  this  is  hot  the  fulfilment  of  the  Pentecostal  first-fruits. 
The  other  application  more  concerns' us  now. 

"Thp  church  is  also  Abraham's  seeiti;  for,  as  St.  Paul  says, 
'  if  ye  be  Christ's  ye  are  Abraham's  seed,  aud  heirs  according  to 
the  promise.'  To  the  church,  therefore,  belongs  the  same  pro- 
mise, as  first-fruits  with  Christ,  not  to  be  blessed  only,  but  to  be 
a  blessing,  in  its  own  heavenly  and  spiritual  sphere.  For  if  the 
• '  Jew  on  earth  shall  be  a  '  kingdom  of  priests,'  what  is  our  hope 
but  to  be  also  heavenly  '  kings  aud  priests'  ?  As  kings,  for  i\n\ 
Lord  shall  say,  'Be  thou  over  five  cities,'  to  rule  and  order  iii  tlie 
"^  coming  age  what  rcqiiires  order  ;  not  only  with  Christ  to  'judge 
the  world,'  but  to  bo  'equal  unto  the  angels,'  and  to  'judge  the 


"THE   RESTITUTION  OF   ALL  TBI 


N^S." 


411 


angels'  ;*  aspr/>.s/s,  for  a  priest  is  'for  those  out  of  the  way,'  to 
niiuistfu-  to  those  who  are  yet  out  oi  the  way.  .  .  .  Christ 
barely  ciitvvca  on  His  priestly  work  till.  H«'  had  passed  through 
death  and  judgment  ;t  so  with  those;  who  are  Christ's,  their  death 
and  resurrection  shall  only  introdueo  them  to  fuller  and  wider 
service  to  lost  ones,  over  whom  the  Lord  shall  set  them  as  His 
priests  and  .kings,  until  all  things  are  restored  and  reconciled  \into 
Him.'  ., 

Priesthood  is  not  for  "  lost  ones."  Christ  as  a  priest,  in  con- 
trast with  the  Jewish  priests,  is  "separate  from  sinners." 
Even  they  ministered  only  withhi  the  limits  of  the  chosen 
people,  and  our  priesthood  nmst  confonn  to  this.  Here  Mr. 
Jukes'  interpretation  ends.  The  shadows  of  the  law,  that 
were  to  preach  the  perfect  gospel  unpreaclied  by  the  gospel, 
are  utterly  silent  as  to  the  "  wider  hope."  After  this  long 
argument  the  only  result  is  a  "^w^.s-^ /<?»,.  and  an  nnanswercd 
question,  as  far  as  Mr.  Jukes  is  concerned. 

"  To  whom,  I  ask,  shall  the  church  after  death  be  priest^  ? 
Shall  it  be  to  that  great  mass  of  our  fellowmen,  who  have  departed 
hence  in  ignorance  ?  Shall U  be  to  'spirits  in  prison,'  supji  as 
those  to  whom  after  His  death  Christ  preached  ?  Shall  wo^  His 
saints,  made  like  Him,  do  the  same  works,  still  following  Him, 
and  with  Him  being  priests  to  God  ?  Will  not  their  glory  be  to 
rule  and  feed  and  enlighten  and  clothe  those  who  are  committed 
to  them,  even  as  Christ  has  fed  and  clothed  them  ?".... 

And  THAT  is  the  argument,  I  have  given  it  really  at 
superfluous  length,  but  it  was  well  to  see  the  whole,  if  only 
for  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  how  simply  impossible  it  is  to 
make  ScApture  contradict  Scripture.  Mr.  jukes  calls  it 
reconciling,  of  course ;  but  there  was  nothing  to  reconcile. 
And  a  reconciliation  which  can  only  be  accomplished  by 
sinklmj  Great  Babylo7i  into  the  imter  of  life,  a^  he  does  a 
little  further  oii,t  most  people  will  after  all^^hink  exem- 

*  Judgment  is  with  Mr.  Jukes  a  mode  of  salvation,  and  we  afe  tO| 
save  the  fallen  angels  so  ! 

t  He  did  not  enter  on  it  at  all  till  then :  "  for  if  He  were  on  earth  He 
should  not  be  a  priest  "  (Heb.  viii,  4). 

X  p.  41. '  


1;; 


412         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  6TATE. 

pllfies  one  of  his  own  principles  in  a  rather  startling  way. 
But  none  Avho  know  what  Scripture  is  will  thank  him  for  a 
^alviiUou  of  It  tn-owjht  hj  ita  dcsiriu-tinn.  As  they  do  not 
holieve  in  the  process,  so  neither  will  they  aeoept  the  result. 

Mr.  Jukes  urges  in  another  part  of  his  book  th.at—    > 
"  tho  precepts  which  Gocl  has  given  are  in  their  way  as  strong  a 
witness  as  His  direct  promises.     Hear  the  law  respecting  bond- 
men, and  strangers,  and  >  debtors,  and  widows,  and  orphans,  lin.l 
the   i>unishmeut  of  the  wicked,  Avhich   may  not   exceed   forty 
stripes,  '  lest,  if  it  exceed,  then  thy  brother  sluuiW  seem  vile  unto 
thee  ; '  yea,  even  tlie  law  respecting  asses  fallen  into  a  pit  :  hear 
'  the   prophets   exhorting   to  'break  evei-y  yoke,' to  'let  the  op- 
pressed go  fr<..e,'  and  to  'undo  the  heavy  burdens'  :  hear  the 
still  elearer  witness  of  the  gospel,  not  to  '  let  the  sun  go  down 
upon   our  wrath,  V  to  'forgive  not  until  seven  times,' but  unto 
seventy  times  seven,'  'not  to  be  overcome  of  evil,  but  overcome 
(^vil  with  good  ' ;  to  '  walk  in  love  as  Christ  has  loved  us,'  and  to 
'  be  imitators  of  God  as  dear  children  ' :— see  the  judgment  of 
those  who  neglect  the  poor,  and  the  naked,  and  the  hungry,  and 
the  stnniger,  and  the  prisoner  ;  and  then  say,  Shall  God  do  that 
which   Ho  abhors  ?      ShaU  He  ommand   that  bondmen   and 
debtors  be  freed,  and  yet  Himself  keep  those  who  are  in  woi-se 
bondage  and  under,  a  greater  debt  in  endless  imprison  Ant  ^> 
Shall  He  care  for  widows  and  orphans,  ivnd  Himself  forgeTthis 
widowed  nature,  whiclUas  lost  its  Head  and  Lord  and  those 
poor  orphan  souls,  whic\  cannot  cry,  '  Abba,  Father '  ?     Shall 
He  limit  punishment  to  forty  stripes,  '  lest  thy  brother  seem  vile,' 
and  Himself  ii|(Jict  far  more  upon  those  who  though  faUen  ai^ 
still  Mis  children  ?    Is  not  Christ  the  faithful  iMraolile,  who  ful- 
fils the  law,  and  shall  He  break  it  in  any  one  of  these  particulars  ? 
^ Shall  Ho  say,  'Forgive,  till  seventy  times  seven,'  and  HimseH 
not  forgive  except  in  this  short  life  ?    Shall  He  command  us  to 
.>vercoine  cnul  witlvipod,  and  Himself,  the  Almighty,  beovercome 
ot  evil  i    Shall  He  judge  those  who  leave  the  captives  unvisited, 
and  Himself  leave  .captives  in  a  worse  prison  forever  unvisitod  ? 
Does  H^  not  again  and  again  appeal  tO  our  own  natural  fefelin^-s 
of  mercy,  as  witnessing  'how  much  more'  we  may  expect^'a 
larg(?r  mercy  from  oicr  Father  which  is  in  heaven  ?    If  it  were 
Otherwise,  might  not  the  adversary  reproach,  and  say,  Thou  that 
t'-aeluTst  and  judgest  another,  teachest  thou  not  thyself  ?    Not 


1 


"TUK    llESTITUTlO^f    OF   Al.i-  THINGS." 


418 


— _^ 


llius  will  God  Ix-justilieJ.     But,  blessed  be  His  Nanus  He  hIiuH 
in:illbo  jiistifunl."* 

lu  that  assurance  %vo  kIuiU  all,  I  believe',  unite.     i3ut  Mr. 
Jukes  can  Hcarcely  thus  turn  the  questions  that  ho  puts  into 
the  aftirmatiouii  tlmt  he  fain  would  make  of  them.     lie  con- 
founds things  widely  ditfercnt.     lie  forgets  or  omits  what 
•is  in  the  highest  degree  essentiil  to  the  argument.     Who 
would   suppose   that   according   to   him   the   law  had   any 
heavier  penalty  thaii  the  "  forty  stripes  "  referred  to  ?     Dr. 
Farrar  can  make  the  execution  of  a  criminal,  and  the  casting 
forth  of  his  utiburied  corpse  amid  the  llanies  an^  worms  of 
the  valley  of  Hinnom  the  figin-e  of  cor»-ective  and  remedial 
punishment.     Mr.  Jukes  .seetiisi  to  forj^et  that  the  penalty  of 
death  ever  existed  for  ma^factors  under  the  law.     For  if,  it 
did  exist,  he  could  hardly  say  that  God  enjoined  for  all 
offenders  either  continual  forgiveness,  or  temporary  punish- 
ment merely*    Is  death  the  figure  of  cither  V     If  not,  of 
what  is  it  a  figure  ?    Surely,  as  I  have  before   argued,  a 
punishment  inflicted  by  man  which,  as  for  as  he  is  concerned, 
Has  no  end  and  (^nnot,  be  reversed,  must  be  the  figure  of 
that  which  if  divine  has  not  forever  end  or  reversion.     I 
know  Mr.  Jukes  says  that  death  is  the  wdy  to  life,  and  de- 
struction but  a  process  of  salvation ;  but  no  criminal  exe- 
cuted by  a  government  ever  believed  that  these  were  one 
and  the  same  thing  to  him,  or  intended  as  such  by  those 
who  sentenced  him. 

V  Again,  what  would  mercy  to  an  ttnrepenting  .criminal  inr 
volve  ?  Has  Mr.  Jukes  forgotten  that  of  some  even  in  this 
life'  it  is  said,  "  it  is  impossible  to  renew  them  unto  repent- 
ance" ?  Does  he  not  understand  tlipt  the  mercv  which  with 
us  as  individuals  may  be  right  and  good,  may  be  the  reverse 
of  both  if  practised  wholesale  by  a  government  ?  He  con- 
founds these  thing  as  if  ho.' did  not  understand  it.  Nay,  he 
speaks  of  God's  remission  of  imperative  judgment  as  "  letting 
the  oppressed  go  fvGc^*  \ 
But  I  do  not  think  it  needful  to  argue  further.  We  have 
_       .. .  *  P|».  <);^  <)i.        -^^^ 


."v 


ti 


lii';^::. 


■  f. 


■t 


I-- 


I*' 


414         PACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

it  confessed  by  Mr.  Jukes  himself  that  "  the  gospel  in  its 
breadUi  an<t  depth -cannot  be  set  forth  but  by  the  figures 
of  the  law."  When  these  figures  are  appealed  to,  we  find 
not  the  slenderest  evideqce  to  show  that  the  "later-born 

•  brethren  "  to  whom  God's  '*  first-bom  "  sons  are  to  bo  kings 
and  priests  are  those  ih  hell.  The  ages  of  torment,  instead 
ofcheing  limited  and  temporary  with  an  eternity  of  universal 

•  blessedness  beyond,  are  limited  only  by  the  life  of  God 
Himself  And  lastly,  the  destruction  which  he  would  have 
to  be  a  method  of  salvation,  is  everywhere  in  Scripture  de- 

-  fined  as  its  opposite.  These  are  the  fundamental  principles 
of  his  interpretation,  and  with  these  it  necessarily  falls; 
while  ih  our  examination  of  the  Scriptures  proof  upon  proof 

^has  been  given  of  the  contrary  view.     Mr.  Jukes  himself. 
.  confesses  that,  from  his  staud-point  of  universal  salvation, 
"  taken  in  the  letter,  text  clashes  with  text,  on  this  sub- 
ject."*    But  that  gives  up  the  whole  question,  except  letter 
^ancl  figure  an-e  at  issue.     If  they  are,  who  shall  decide  be- 
tween them  ?    ^ay,  how  shall  the  figure  be  interpreted  if 

t  not  by  that  letter,  which  it  seems  is  discordant  with  it  ? 
,1  ^leave  then  Mr.  Jukes  jn  the  self-contradiction  in  which 

■  he  has  involved  himself     Our  account  with  him  is  virtually 

•  dosed,  although  statements  of  his  may.  yet  'come  up  fhf 
examination.  We  must  turn  to  other  advocates  of  universal 
restoration.  / 

*  ;    •  .  ♦?.  117.     .  . 


/■  ■/ 


»         ■  ' 


"TliE   KEtimUXlO^    OJ}'  ALL  TULNOS." 


415 


CHAPTER  XL.  ^ 

"THE  RESTIUTION  OF  ALL  THINGS."— CANON  FAHUAR. 

"  Canon  Parrar  often  names  the  doctrine  of  "  final  resti- 
tution "  (in  the  uniyersalist  sense,  of  course),  and  .his  last 
"excursus"  in^the  appendix  to  his  book  is  entitled " The 
Voice  of  Scripture  respecting  Eternal  Hope."  There  is  little, 
however,  beside  a  list  of  texts,  which  we  shall  presently  con-  ■ 

sider.  THie  first  two  pages  are  taken  up  with  that  protest 
against  isolated  toxts,  which  we  have  alneady  looked  at. 
Then  it  is  urged,  that  "  if  the  doctrine  of  endless  torment  be  - 
true,  it  is  incredible  that,  there  should  be  no  trace  of  it  in 
the  entire  Old  Testament,  except  ^y  putting  on  the  Hebrew 
phrase  '  forever 'a  sense  which  it  dofes  not  and  cannot  bear." 
We  have  gone  so  fully  into  the  question  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment doctrine,  that  this  ^Iso  we  may  pass  by  here. 

His  third  section  i1s  devoted  to  the  consideration  of  the        / 
Jewish  rabbinical,  teachings  upon  the  subject.     I  have  added  ^ 
the  few  texts  they  appeal  to  to  Dr.  F.'s  own  list.     Otherwise     i 
-their  views  are  of  the  very  smallest  value.*     Of  course, 
Josephus  and  the  Pharisees  and  E'ssenes  do  not  appear  in      . 
the  consideration  of  Je\vi8h  doctrine. 

His  fourth   section  19   occupied  mainly  with   advice  to 
"  honest,  serious,  and,  competpjat  readers  "  of  his  book,  as  to  " 

/  u.__,t, ._     — 

*  As  an  example  we  may  give  the  following  in  Dr.  Farrar's  own 
words:  'Hn  a  magnificent  passage  of  Of/ioi/t  (attributed  to  R;  Akiba) 
it  is  said  that  God  has  a  key  of  Gehenna,  and  that  He  will  preach  to  al^ 
the  rigl^eou!? ;  ,that  Zerubbabel  shall  say  the  Kaddish,  and  an  Amen! 
shall  sound  forth  from  Gehenna,  and  that  Qabriel  and  Michael  will  open" 
the  40,000  gates  of  Gehenna  and  set  free  the  dam'ned.  .  Akiha  founds 
this  on  ha.  ccxvi.  1,  reading  sUomcrnyneiiim,  ' j^servinrf  the  Amen,' 
"  for  sho7ner  i-munim, '  keepinffjlie  trut/i '"  /  , 

Of  course;,  accorditig  to  this,  Geherlhit  must  tie  "  in   the-  land  p{ 

Judah."  and  the  righteous  nation  are  th?  lost  in  Gehenna  !  V  • 


V^ 


> 


m. 


m 

I 


•■'f  I'- 
ll 'E  4'- 

jl  i«: 


■I 


^ 


'    -416        FACTS  AND  TUliOlUES  AS  TO  A  FUTVltli  STATE. 

the  spirit  ami  manner  in  which  he  Avould  have'  them  weigh 
tlie  texts  he  addttces.  As  it  includes  a  brief  review  of  the 
subject,  and  spine  tilings  not  said  elsewlicrc,  we  shall  briefly 
glance  at  this,     lie  asks  : — 

"Now  will  liDiiist,  .scrioiib  iiud  competent  readers  weigh  tlic 
plain,  litt-r.il"m,;iniii;^  of  the  texts  which  follow—the  nnmbnr  of. 
which  might  o:fsily  l.o^trcl>lcd,  -  and  in  wishing  thorn  with  an 
Ciivn'ciit  and  piM yrl-fnl  dosiro  to  get  vid  of  trailitional  bias  and  at- 
tain to  tiutli,  will  tlioy  also  do  af>  follo\>-s  ?— 

"i.  Examine-  tlioir  own  consciciu*'c  arid  reason  as  to  all  that 
they  know,  aad  all  that  tlie  Biblo  teaches,,  respecting  the  love  of  ' 
God  and  redejnptioa  througli  Jesus  Christ." 

Only  rcnJmbering  thnt^  what  they  A-no?o  of -cither  cannot 
ti'anscend/Uic  teaching  of  that  Bible.  The  love  of  God  is 
only  really  known  where,  and  so  far  as,  Scripture  is  known. 
And  reason  and  conscience  are  not  other  Bibh's — are  not 
authoritative  -  standards,^)ut  only  make  us  capable  of  re- 
sponsibility, and  actually  resj^onsible,  «to  the  au'thority.of 
God.  -  •  — / 

'-'  ii.  See  7tow  ver>/  little,  which  is  in  theleast  degree  decisive, 
-  'they  can  produce  on  the  cjther  side  ;.  and  how  for  every  Word  of?  , 
that  very  little  nu  explanation  is  offered,  demonstrably  tenable, 
and«  far  more  iu  accordance  with  history  than  that  which  they 
adopt."  ,1       ■  • 

Which  if  true  setitles  the  rnatter.     For  if  universalisra  be 

"  dempiistrably  tenjjble  "  itS'  oi)posit'\i  caynot  be,  save  upon  a 

principle  which   dastroys  the  authority*  of  Scripture  tolto- 

.     getl»er;  *  But  this  may  safely  be  left,  alter  all  that  we  nave 

•      had  before  us. 

"iii.  Considerthe  tremend'ouM  weight  of  evidence  which  must 
be  thrown  against  their  private  interpretation  from' the  fact  that 
neither'the  Jewish  nor  the  Cliristian  nlmrcli  have  evoT  been  al>le 
,    dogmaticallv  to  sanction  it."  -  ^  ' 

Tlie  word  of  God  no  more  needs  the  church's  **  sanction  " 

.    v:'"to  make  it  true,  than  (4od  TJlmsclf  the  permission  of  ITis 

creature  to  exist.     But  Dr.  I'arrar  tanuot  mean  to  imply 

~~       that  the  church  has  ever  jn'owounccd  it  a  doubtful  opinion, 


as  to  all  that 


that  we  iiave 


'     "THE   KESTITUTJLON   OF   ALL  TUlNOiS."  4l7 

or*that  the  ov^lrwhelming  weight  of  human  testimony  has 
not  been  in  favor  of  the^-octrine  he  rejects.  To  me  that 
floes  not  make  it  one  iota^more  authbritative  or  more  trust- 
worthy, because  all  true  faith  is  in  God's  word,  not  man's ; 
but  the  facts  as  to  the  general  ecclesiastical  belief  are 
scarcely  decisive,  against  the  view  still  prevalent. 
'  "  iv.  Remember  that  in  the  extreme  form  in  which  they  hold  it, 
which  excludes  anything  resembling  purgatory,  it  is  directly  op- 
posed to  a  largo  body  of  primitive  teaching,  j\nd  to  the  views  of. 
the  entire  Roman  church. " 

How  the  question  of  **^  a  purgatorial  :fire  where  the  souls 
of  the  righteous  are  purified  by  punishment,"  as  Dr.  Farrar 
himself  states  this  doctrine*  from  the  Catechism  of  the 
Council  of  Trent,  can  mitigate  the  terror  of  eternal  punish- 
ment for  the  wnrightoous,  it^s  hard  to  say.  As  for  primi- 
tive teaching,  it  is  too  large  jy  question  to  take  ftp  here,'and 
•"  honest,  serious,  and  competent  readers  "  will  hardly  assume  * 
what  has  not  been  proved.  But  if  Dr.  Farrar  identifies  it, 
as  \^e  must  suppose,  with  that  "almost  necessary  belief" 
'which  he  speaks  of  in  his  preface,!  then  it  is  hard  to  say  how 
its  exclusion  from  an  ev'nngelical  creed,  should  make  that 
creed  hardej  and  less  merciful.  He  states  it  there  as  "  the 
wide-spread,  ancient,  reasonable,  and,  I  had  almost  said,  ne- 
cessary, belief  yi  some  condition  in  w-hkch^ — by  what--  means 
we  know  not,  whether  by  th&ptpna  sensns  or  onJ[y  the^wswa 
damni — -Imperfect  souls  who  die  in  a  state  unfit  for  heaven 
may  yet  have  perfected  in  them  until  the  day  of  Christ,  "that 
good  work  of  God  which  has  been  in  this  world  begun."  ^ 
That  is  only  what  we  have  before  heard  Qan'on  Farrar  inti- 
mate that  some  whom  he  styles  the  "  poor  in  spirit  "may 
have  to  pass  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  through  the  flapies 
of  Gehenna.  .  Right  or  wrong,  the  evangelical  creedi  is  not 
legs  merciful  surely,  when  it  teaches  that  the  blood  of  Christ  7 
and  the  Spirit  of  God  can  make  a  dying  thief  fit  for  paradise 
the  same  day.  It  is  scarcely  less  «ierci/"«/,  however  little 
he  may  esteem  it  possible,  to  sub.stitute  paradise  for  the  mild- 


l':     -■ 


*  Pref.,p^.'^xvii. 


f  P.  xix. 


h  h 


-  !.■■ 

i 


^1  : 


418         FACTS  AND  TUEOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUUE  STATE. 

est  fofm  of  purgatory.    Nor  does  this  touch  the  question  of 
the  unsaved. 

"  V.  Give  due  weight  to  the  fact  that  many  who  Jiave  devoted 
years  of  earnest  labor  to  the  inquiry— ripe  scholars  and  good  meii» 
orthodox  fathers,  eminent  theologians,  profound  thinjcers,  holy 
and  reverent  inquirers— have  come  to  the  deliberate  conclusion 
that  there  is  not  a  single  text  in  all  Scripture  which  Jiecessitiites 
a  belief  in  endless  torment. " 

But  how  many  who  have  as  patiently  and  laboriously 
come  to  the  opposite  conclusion  ?  The  ert'ect  of  which  upon 
a  really  reverent  soUl  will  be  to  make  him  see  thaj  God  will 
not  allow  that  to  be  settled  by  mere  human  authority,  which 
must  be  ascertained  in  the  presence  of  God  alone,  and  from 
His  word.  Good  mer  may,  alas,  suflfer  themselves  in  many 
ways  to  be  drawn  aside  from  truth ;  but  still  the  word 
stands— for  "Scripture  cannot  bo  broken "-^^' If  any  man 
will  do  (willeth  to  do)  His  will,  he  shall  KNOW  of  the 
doctrine,  whether  it  be  of  God."       <^ 

"  vi.  Bear  specially  in  mind  that  it  rests,  almost  if  not  quite 
exdusivehf,  on  the  meanings  which  they  attach  to  two  words, 
'  Gehenna  '  and  'iEonian,'  of  whiih  the  first,  interpreted  by  the 
only  possible  means  of  iutcrpretation  open  to  us,  cnnnot  bear  the 
sense  which  they  attribute  to  it ;  and  the  other  is  over  and  over 
again  applied  in  Scripturti  to  indefinite  but  limited  time,  or  to 
that  which  transcends  all  coii('<ipt ion  of  time," 

So  far  from  its  being  merely  a  question  of  either  word, 
there  are  -a  number  of  passages  which  would  be  decisive 
without  either.  Every  passage  which  speaks  of  final  "  de- 
struction "  or  ''  the  second  death,-'  such  statements,  as  "he 
shall  not  see  life,"  "  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God  " ; 
that  "  no'ic  is  the  accepted  time,"  and  "  now  is  the  day  of 
salvation  "  ;  all  the  passages,  the  most  solemn  and  full  in  all 
Scripture,  of  the  book  of  Revelation ;  all  these,  among  other 
testimonies,  refute  Dr.  Farrar's  first  assertion. 

Then  as  to  Gehenna,  if  the  students  of  the  rabbins  are 

,hat  it  means,  few  roa(lera  compara- 


alone  competent  to  say  v,\ 

tively,  however  "honest  and  serious,"  can  be  pronounced 


■1^ 


"THE   RESTITUTION  QF  ALL  THIN  OS." 


419 


"co^fitent."  But  why  should  6i:)ntra(lictory  and  hyper- 
bolical rabbins  be  more  trustworthy  than  tlie  testimony  of 
•Scripture  itself^  Why  on  il«  authority  may  we  not  say 
that  '•  Gehenna  "  is  a  place,Where  •'  ,s(ni|  and  body  "  are  '*  de- 
stroyed "  ;  as  well  as  on  that  of  the  it'wksh  doctors,  that 
"the  judgment  of  Gehenna  is  for  twelve^ months,"  or  that 
"  Gehenna  is  pothing  but  a  (lay  in  whlcFi  "Um  impious  shall 
be  burnt,"  or  that  "  after  the  last  judgmontNfcrehenna  exists 
no  longer  "—that,  last  judgment  in  wliieh  men  are  adjudged 
^to  Gehenna!  All  these  statements  are  given  Ijy  Dr.  t^rrar 
himself  froni  his  own  chief  authority,  the  Talmud. 

Again,  as  to  "tteonian,"  we  have  seen  tlfat  while  in  other 
writings  we  can  trace  a  growing  use  of  "  aion"  for  eternity, 
when  used  in  the  sense  of  duration  at  all,  aeonial  is  never 
less  than  ''everlasting."  And  though  we  may  speak  of 
"everlasting  hills"  this  does  not  make  the  proper  force  of 
the  word  doubtful.  '  > 

1>.  Farrar  would  have  his  readers  begin  their  Scripture 
search  with  the  matter  already  almost  settled  for  them  out- 
side of  Scripture. 
His  next  piece  of  advice  is  characteristic  enouch  :— 
"  vii.'  Be  shamed  into  a  little  humility— a.  little  doubt  as  to  their 
own  absolute  infalUbillty  on  all  religious  subjects  —a  little  sense 
of  their  possible  ignorance  or  iu vincible  prejudice— «  little  absti- 
nence from  cheap  ^ftnafhemas  and  contemptibh  m/Mmwies— a  little 
avoidance  of  snoli  base  weapons  of  controversy  as  tEoTissertion- 
that  those  who  hold  such  views  as  Inhere  have  advocated  are  re- 
peating the  devil's  whisper,  "  Thou  slialt  not  surely  die.'  "       / 

To  all  this  I  maybe  excused  from  replying;  l^ittrnote 
what  follows ::—  ' 

"  By  not  losing  sight  of  the  fact  that  (1)  these/views  have  been" 
held  in  substance,  not  only  (as  I  li^e  said)  by  great  teachers  and 
holy  saints,  but  also  by  W'hole  c«^-ches  ;  and  (2)  that  they  arc 
involved  in  practices  so  universal  and  so  primitive  as  prayers/or 
the  dead.    The  Kaddish,  or  prayer  for  the  dead,  in  the  jre\^sh 

if  SO  was 


liturgies,  is  probabhr  as  old  as  the  time  of  nnr  T^nrrl,  nnd  j 


by  Him  unf&proved,  though  it  was  believed  to  be  efficacious  for  the 
relief  of  souls  in  Gehenna." 


'.■:-m- 


1 


"•^v 


I?*- 


420        FAC-rS  AN'l)  TIIEOUIRS  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATU. 

Dr  Farrur  does  not  refuse  very  dubious  texts,  as  wc  see, 
tVom  U..t  other  Bible  of  hist<>ry  in  wbieh  »-  J^''*:;;;;^'  ^;;; 
itiHaiM,naeron.stu-umenttob;iseuiM».r:ui     .1.        I  be  next     . 

text  is  not  less  dubious,  though  fn.ni  Scripture.  ^ 

..Euuueut  commentator.,  oounrnviug  2  Tim.  i.  l«;"^^^j^^-  ; 
.uul  iv  19  have  believed  that  St.  Panl'.s  prayer  for  Onesiphorus  s 
a  pr  mi  for  one  who  was  dead;  and  he  does  not -reprove  ho 
;.S^of  even  so  superstitious  ^  praetice  as  bapUsm  for  the     . 

dead."  .        .  \\ 

The  first  of  these  is  again  a  largo  conelusion  from  scant 
premises.    Paul  salutes  the  house  of  Onesiphorus,  no  mention 
made  of  Onesiphorus  himself.     He  prays  ibr  inercy  to  las 
Cuse,  and  "tlit  he  may  find  the  mercy  of  ^^e  Lo-^-J^ha 
dav  "  and  as  Onesiphoyus  does  not  appear  m  all  this,  it  must 
be'^ferred  it  was  a  prayer  for  the  dead!     In  an  oppo.t. 
.  interest,  how  would  Canon  Farrar  treat  such  a  -on^^^l^re^ 
Yet  the   second  argument  is  worse.     W  here  does  the 
aposlle^peak  of  the  imnaiple  of  the  practice  o    "baptism 
for  the  dead"?    Nowhere.  -Re  argues,  if  anything  /o.  /A. 
■.practice  Mf.     "  Else  wKat  shall  they  do  who  are  baptized 
Cbe  dead  if  the  dead  rise  not  at  all  ?  why  are  they  then 
baptised  for  the   dead?     And  why  stand  we  in  jeopardy 
every  hour?.  I  prqtest.  .  .  I  die  daily"  (1  Cor.  xv.  29-31). 
If  this  is  not  approving  the   practice,!  know  not  what  is. 
Fancy  the  apostle  urging  in  his  argument  tor  resurrection. 
<'  Else  what  shall  they  do  who  are  (so  superstitiously  !)  bap- 
tlzcl  for  the  dead."     As  for  the  principle,  he  says  nothmg 
aboutit.     What  was  the  principle?     What  was  the  practice 
evcn'^     Dr.  Farrar  ev.idently  refers  to  a  suppositious  cer; 
cmony  "  never  a;lopted  except  by  some  obscure  sects  of 
Gnostics,  who  seem  to  have  founded  their  custom  on  this 
very  passage,';*  tlie  *  practice  of  siibmitting  to  baptism^ 

■  *Oonvbearea,;;  llowson;  Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Pai^.   'in  their 

Conybeaie  am  ^      -  the  ""ly  meaning  the  Greek  seems 


..ntP  ii'iioii  tlie  text  tliey  .speak  of  it  as  — , — 

note  u,,on  u  e  u^x.    -.  ^a^.:  1^  explanation  is  liahle  to  very  great 
to  admit        jet,    uiej   f-'^ .  »  .    „ ,,  „.  q.  Pn„l  should 

difficulties."     The  first  difHcul.y  they  ment.on  is  '  hat  St^  ^^^J^Z 
,ef..r  to  such  a  ,  superstition  without  rebukmg  it.      The  second. 


'•m" 


♦'THE   HESTITUTION  OP   ALL  THINGS. 


421 


iu>t    ri'piovf  the  p_rim-l/>/c  of  it» — H  principle  jwhieh   must 
have  iml»lit'<l  ihA  need  of  Imptism  to  free  from  the  penaltieH 


Borae  person  who  had  difeclunbaptized.     Dr.  Farrar  owns 
it  as   u  ''  su|M'rHtitious  cuHtojn  " ;  yet  thinkM  the  apoHtlo  does 

jot    reprove   the 

lUve  im|>lietl  thA 
of  sin,  and  tlie  ppssibility  of  the  living  making  up  the  de- 
ficiencies of  the  d^ad  !  a  thing  too  gross  to  be  accepted  by 
the   ritualistic   Ctfristianity  which  so  soon   succeeded   the  < 

apostolicgk 

Yet  in  iRie  lig}»t  of  tlie  context  the  diflioulties  of  tlio  pas- 
sage are  not  insuperaV)le.  Why  cannot  the  ordinary  rite  be 
styled— for  it  is  evident  there  was  no  special  one—*'  baptism 
in  place  of  the  dead,"*  simply  because  those  freshly  receiving 
it  were  tilUngup  thp  ranks  in  what  wa!|  then  indeed  "  the 
noble  army  of  martyrs  " — of  men  '*  aj)pointed  unto  death. "t 
The  verses  following  show  that  in  this  track  the  apostle's 
thoughts  were  runnnig.  "I  protest  I  die  daily.  If  after 
the  manner  of  nicn  I  have  fought  witli  beasts  at  Ephesus, 
what  advantageth  it  me,  if  the  dead,  rise  not?"  Why 
should  it  be  so  very  strafnge  an ,  expression  for  him  to  use, 
"baptism  in  j)lac6  of  the  dead,"  under  ^Hch  circumstances 
and  in  such  a  connection  'i  Especially  when  the  choice  is 
between  this  and  the  apostle's  sanction  of  "  so  supemitious  a 
practice"  as  Dr.  Farrar  owns  the  otbe'r  to  have  been — a 
l)ra('tice  which  there  is  no  evidence  ever  existed  ? 

The  a.ntiquity  of  the  practice  of  prayers  for  the  dead  "we 
may  concede  to  Dr.  ];^arrar,  as  of  many  anothecr error  wh^ch 
Scripture  shows  us  coming  in. already  in  apostolic  days- 
Superstition  is  not  tli«  more  venerable  lor  its  grey  hairs. 

"viii.  Let  them  woigh- the  fuv;t  that  wlmt  Christ  did^oncc- 
Uiimely,  preach  to  the  lost,  g^uid  opon^or  them  the  prison  doors-^ 

tluscontinuance  of  ^ifoli  a  pralnice  "  in  the  period  which  followed,  when 
a  magical  eflicacy  was  more  and  more  ascribed  to  the  material  act  of: 
,  baptUin."  They  conclude  that  "  the  passage  must,  be  considered  to 
adiiiAfl!  of  no  satisfactory  explanation." 

*  vnifi  TK)v  veH/icjy.  'Tnip  is  undoubtedly  used  ip  this  sense 
in  2  Cor.  v.  20  and  Philem.  13,  though  it  is  not*a  frequent  use  in  the 
New  Xestam'jiiit.  "  _ 

■tOh.  iv.9.   :_.:„._1^:-l:J_,1_,:,_^::::1;1:,  _.:^_: ._::.;_,..,. /,^_.::  ,.:V_„;:;:.. 

'■■■.:  '.-     ;  ■  -^      '■■  '■.■■■      '■■'  ■■-''. 


'.  ^'  ■ 


H 


V: 


11 
II, 


'    %     •!:! 


'1  ■  .- 


)i 


ilil: 


422        FACTS  AND  THEORKd  A8  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

He  may  do  again  aud  ever.  The  text  on  TvhicU  I  preached 
•tLoJblesHcd  light  on  one  of  the  durkeHt  emgmaH  of  Dmno 
iusSr^the  caHos  iu  which  the  tlnul  doom  -— "f  "J^^'^^. ^f,.f 
roportion  to  the  lapse  which  has  iucurrod  it.'  [VVas  thut^tho 
^^h  the  CorinthiauH  Vj     Thi«  was  tl.u  interpretation  of  the 

early  fathers."  .  *     * 

Which  does  not  save  it,  nevertheless,  from  being  error. 
Lone  before  this,  in  view  of  what  was  coming  in,  the 
Alltle  Paul  commended  the  Ephesian  Christians  'Ho  God 
«L.A.  Wo/7//.,.«c.";  and  we  have  ^^U^^J^^ 
need  of  the  injunction  attte  present  day  ^-P^'.^, 
elusive  in  this  case  against  the  interpretation  of  the  lathers, 

however  early  or  many.  "  .     .     ,    x*     i  •  i 

Wc  may  now  turn  to  the  p»«age8,th«  princ.pal  ot  wh.cl, 
have  been  already  e^camined.t    The  first  a  (Sen.  ui.  15,  tho 
p^eaioOon  of  the^erpent»  head  being  bruised  by  th_,  wo 
manrseed  which  o  Jy  needs  to  be  referred  to  again,  on 
Xun   of  a  qaouttion  from  Dr.  Chauneey"  H»-  could 

~  .0.  if  sltan  triumphed  by  .-;-S  ""'■o-  »  .^«  r. 
slaves'  In  this  case  could  it  be  sa.d, !»  m  I«i  In..  1-i,  "i 
slTsce  of  the  travail  of  his  soul  and  be  satisfied,  for  1,,. 
shall  bear  their  iniquities '?  "  „ 

The  Iwer  to  the  first  question  is,  that  Satan  wdl  nev 
Jul  sin-le  slave.  His  reign  in  hell  is  a  m,.re  dream  a„d 
fdelL  on!  To  the  second,  the  answer  wUl  be  found  very 
simplTby  quoting  the  whole  passage  :  "  He  shall  see  of  .1,,. 
StL 'ravaiTof  hissouland  be  -«f  ^  ;4^^';;  f,  [  ^ 
e,l<je  shaU  n,//  rk/lueota  Servant  rot..!!/  MA>y,  to' 

'     '"fZ^^-adauced,  »hl.h  nee*  no  '-'•"-f-  CrUi';': 
:    John  1.29;  '"•  J  •  ^'^  '  ,,•„',„    .,o    -n  .  xi.  32;  xiv.  9;  1   Cor.  xv 

xxii.  i 


I  ; 


"TUE   UEaTITUTION   OF   ALL  TlilNGH.' 


428 


Weill,  who  naturally  quotes  down  to,  "  an«l  will  by  no  means 
clear  the  guilty,"  which  ho  omits.  ,^ 

(.'].)  Psa.  XXX.  5  ho  aliHo  appeals  to :  '*  His  wrath  cndureth 
but  the  twinkling  of  an  eye,  hut  His  favor  a  lifetime";  but 
those  words  are  part  of  an  exhortation  to  the  Lord's  sfuints 
to  sing  to  llini,  and  are  illustrate«l  hy  the  deliverance  which 
the  Psalmist  has  experienced  from  his  enemies.  They  apjdy 
to  the  «liscii)lino  of  the  righteous,  and  not  to  the  punishment 
of  the  wicked.  _  . 

(t.)  Psa.  Ixii.  M*  is  one  of  the  texts  (with  Mic.  vil.  18- 
20,  etc.),  upon  which  Kabbi  Aibo  founds  the  remission  oi 
eternal  punishment  for  all  except  the  worst.  Nothing -is 
Haid  about  it,  however,  in  the  psalm,  but  "  two  things  "f  are 
ascribed  to  Ood,  power  and  mercy,  and  these  will  be  shown 
in  rendering  to  every  man  according  to  his  work.  All  the 
Testis  speculation.  And  the  passage  hi  Micah  speaks  ot 
God's  mercy  in  Israel's  restoration  in  the  lattqr  day. 

(5.)  Psa.  ciii.  0  :  "  lie  will  not  always  be  chiding,  neither 
.  keepeth  He  His  anger  forever,"  is  one  of  Dr.  Farrar's  own 
texts,  bat  the  application  throughout  the  psalm  is  again 
quite  obvious,  as  especially  the  iVth  and  IHth  verses,  Avhere 
"the  mercy  of  the  Lord  is  from  everlasting  to  everlasting  o?t 
thein  that  fear  lUm^  ...  to  such  as  keep  Ilis  covenant,  and 
to  those  that  remember  His  commandments  to  do  them." 

(C.)  Psa.  cxxxix.  8 :  "  If  I  make  my  bed  in  hell,  behold, 
Thou  art  there  " : — (i  >r^i*y  strange  quotation  ou  Dr.  Farrar's 
part,  made  still  more  strange  by  the  poetry  in  his  note.l 

*  V.  13  umst  '>e  ineaiut-  accoidin?  to  th«  Ilwbrew  numbering,  12  in 
the  English.       >  . 

t  Delitzscli  translates  ;  "  One  thing  hath  Elohini  spoken,  these  two 
have  I  hoard,"  etc. 

4^  "  What  hell  may  be  I  know  not :  this  I  know, 
'^  I  cannot  lose  the  j»resoiioe  of  th6  Lord  :  ... 

';    One  arm— Humility — takes  hold  upon  \ 

Ilis  dear  humanity  ;  the  other.  Love, 
~  Clasps  His  divinity,  so  where,!  go.  ~ 

He  goes  ;  and  better  fire-walled  hell  with  Him, 
than  golden-gated  paradise  withoiit." 


ft 


n 


*• 


424        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUUE  STATE. 

Strange-becau^e  the  word  for  "hell"  is  (as  of  course  he 
knows)  sheol;  one  of  the  words  he  speaks  of  elsewhere  as 
deno^g  "  a  place  both  for  the  bad  and  the  good,"  and  which 
"means  an  intermediate  state  of  the  soul  previous  to  judg- 
ment,"* and  not,  therefore,  "  hell "  in  the  ordinary  sense  at 
all.  Made  stranger  by  the  poetry  he  quotes ;  for  that  would 
make  it  appear  that  hell  was  a  receptacle  for  those  who  clmg 
in  humility  and  love  to  Christ.       t  .     - 

rii)  Isa.  Ivii.  10 :  "  For  I  will  not  contend  forever,  neither 
will%)e  always  wroth :  for  the  spirit  should  fail  before  me, 
and  t¥e^loul^  which  I  have  made.'^  This  has  been  already 
urged  by  Mr.'  Constable  in  behalf  of  annihilation,  as  by 
Canon  Farrar  for  restoration.  In  truth  *t  has  nothing  to  do 
with  either,  being  simply  the  reason  w^y  the  Lord  will  not 
pursue  Israel  to  extremity,  as  having  purposes  of.  mercy 
toward  her.     This  is  what  the  context  positively  proves. 

(8.)  Isa.  xlix.  9  :  ^'That  thou  mayest  say  to  the  prisoners, 
Go  forth;  to  them  that  are  in  darkness,  Show  yourselves." 
This  is  quoted  by  Mr.  Jukes,  as  well  as  Dr.  Farrar,     It  is 
an  address  of  Jehovah  prophetically  to  Messiah,  and  applies 
expressly  to  the  earth  and  npt  to  hell  at  all:  "I  will -also 
give  Thee  fo*-  a  Ught  to  the  Gentiles,  that  Thou  mayest  be  my , 
wlvation  unto  the  end  of  the  earth,  ....  to  establisli  tho 
earth  to  cause  to  inherit  the  desolate  heritages ;  that  Thou 
mayest  say  to  the  prisoners.  Go  forth,"  etc.    Similar  lan- 
guage is  used  in  familiar  passages,  where  none  would  dream 
of  carrying  it  further.!    Dr.  Farrar  must  assume  that  it  ap- 
plies to  hell.    Will  he  say  why  ?  ^ 

(9)  Hos.  vi.  1:  "  Come,  and  let  us  return  to  the  Lord: 
for  He  hath  torn,  and  He  will  heal  us;  He  hath  smitten, 
and  He  will  bind  us  up."  How  this,  which  does  speak  of 
the  Lord's  mercy  to  the  penitent,  bears  upon  the  question 
of  the  judgment  of  the  impenitent,  it  is  again  difficult  to  say. 
(10.)  Hos.  xiv.  4  :  "I  will  heal  their  backsliding,  I  will 
love  them  freely ;  for  mine  anger  is  turned  away  from  him." 
Here  also  a  word  of  explanation  would  have  been  accept- 


*  pref.,  p.  xxxi. 


t  As,  6.  g.  .Isa.  Ixii.  7,  Ixi.  1,  Luke  iv.  18-2V. 


M 


V 

'• 


"the  kestitution  of  aIl  things.** 


425 


able.     How  does  this  show  that'Crod'a  anger  will  be  turned 
away  from  those  under  "  eternal  judgment "  ? 

(11.)  Luke  ix.  56,  I  give  without  cotoment:  "For  the 
Son  of  Man  is  not  come  to  destroy  men's  lives,  but  to  save 
them  " !  ^ 

(12.)  Luke^xii.  47,  48 :  "He  that  knew  not  his'Lord's  will 
and  did  commit  things  worthy  of  stripes  shall  he  beaten  with 
few  stripes.^'  That  I  surely  believe ;  but  a  man  must  be 
born  again  to  go  to  heaven.  * 

(13,14.)  Phil.  ii.  10,  11;  Col.  i.  19,  20  :— These  have  been 
looked  at  before.    I  only  mention  them  here  to  allow  place  * 
to  Mr.  ]Minton'8   observations,  of  course  from  a  different 
point  of  view  to  Dr;  Farrar. 

Mr.  Minton  contends!  that  "  all  things,"  in  the  latter  pas- 
sage, means  "the  whole  universe,"  as  being  what  is  spokein 
of  in  ver. .10  as  "  created  by  Christ;  for  precisely  th«e  same 
language  is  used  with  regard  to  both.  .  .  .  If  Gehenna  be  a 
locality,  it  is  p«r<  of  the  earth  as  represented  to  St.  John  by 
the  lake  of  fire.  And  when  we  are  told  that  even  on  our 
view  *  hell  has  to  be  excepted  '  fiipm  the  universal  reconcilia- 
tion, we  reply,  that  when  that  reconciliation  is  completed, 
hell  will  have  done  its  work,  and  passed  away  with  the  first 
earth  on  which  it  was  seen.  ...  In  each  case  the  universe 
is  regarded  as  a  whole.  .  .  There  is  nothing  in  existence 
which  Christ  did  not  originally  create,  and  there  shall  at 


*  Mr. "Cox  (Salv.^  Mun.,  p.  186)  adduces  Rom.  xiv.  9-11,  to  urge  that ' 
"  as  *  no  man  can  contess  that  Jesus  is  the  Lord  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost,' 
th«  dead  who  are  to  bow  to  Him,  as  well  as. the  living,  must  be  open  to 
the  renewing  ministry  of  the  Divine  Spirit :  open  to  it !  yes,  and  merci- 
fully condemned  (0  and  exposed  to  it  until  every  one,  even  the  most 
stubborn,  be  compelled  to  yield  it."(!)  Now  "no  man  can  say  that 
(not'  confess  ')  Jesus  Christ  is  Lord  but  by  the  Holy  Ghost"  is  a  ques- 
tion of  power,  not  life.  Many  will  say  in  that  day  "  Lord,  Lord,"  and  be 
condemned  (Matt.  vii.  22).  But  condemned,  says  Mr.  Cox,  to  the 
renewing  ministry  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  "  The  heart  of  fools  proclaimeth 
foolishness." 

tAVay  Everlasting,  pp.  23,  24,  note. 


,«»«***'■ 


426        FACTS  AND  inEOWES  AS  Vo*.FUTfKF,  STATE.       , 

last  te  nothing  in  eristence  that  H.  ha«  not  reconciled  to  ; 

^^  Nowthe  passingaway  of  hell  with  the  fir^  earth  is  nhnply 
a  dream  of  Mr.  Mhiton'H,  inasmuch  as  the  dead  are  not  cast 
into  it  till  after  the  earth  and  the  heavens  are  fled  away. 
And  hell  and  those  in  it  are  never  mentionec],  as  to  he  re- 
conciled "  at  all.  They  are  given  as  a  third  class  m  the  pas- 
sage in  Phiiri>piaBs,  where  subjection  and,  not  reconciUation 
isfpoken  of:  ''that  at  the  nameof  Jesus  every  knee  Bhoud 

bow,  of  heavenly  beings,  of  earthly,  -^1  tlTher 
Plainly  heavenly  and  earthly  do  not  here  mc  ud.  this  otht. 
class  of  ittfernal  beings,  and,  therefore,  all  thmgsm  heaven 
and  in  earth  do"  not,  if  Scripture  is  consistent  with  .^^ 
it  surely  is.  This  is  demonstration  that  Mr.  Mmtons  thought 
of  the  expression  meaning  strictly  "  the  universe     is  mcor- 

But  he  is  not  willing  to  give  it  up,  ncvertheleBS,  an.l  he 
urges  that  in  the  passage  in  Philippians  in  the  or.gmal,- 
.. .  „r  is  '  U  tl>e  name  of  Jesus.'  and  that  St.  Paul  i.  te.chiug 
the  Philippians  precisely  what  he  taught  the  Colo»s.am.  tliongU 
todffie  en?lan^e.    He  dechaes  that  aU  the  iutohgont  mu- 
"r^all  uttiTtSy  '  bow  ■  to  .  God  the  Father.'  tlu.t  is,  W-,, , 
gT  'in  the  name  of  Jesus.'    'J,  M.  C  appeai-s  to  thmlc  tl  a 
"under  the  earth'  means  GehenuJ.    But  no  oue  has  been  east 
into  Gehenna  yet ;  and  it  appears  to  St.  John  as  ou  the  »u  f, 
oi  the  earth.    If  he  will  once  more  refer  to  the  original,  he  ^u  1 
:  ethat  the  word  is  one  eommouly  used  iu  Greek  lor  «.  <W. 
When  speaking  of  the  'all  things,' St.  Pa.d  divides    hem    ut,. 
te%et.  with  everything  belonging  to  it,  and  all  the  rest  of 
cr^itW    When  speaking-not  of  all  'things,'  as  enoneously 
t^sHtedin  Phil.   i..  but-of  all  umiymt  creatures,  he  d.vuhu. 
wtrUo"  of  creation  whieh-is  subject  to  death  into  the  l,..n, 
lud  Z  rfW.  probably  to  convey  an  assurance  o    .esm-iecta 
•C  the  dead.  .  .  .  -Theie  will  not  be  left  iu  the  whole  uuivei.. 
"gle  knee  which  does  not  bow  to  God  the  Father  in  tlie 
•      ^^' Jesus.    It  is  'subiection;  no  doubt ;  but  it  -  "  «S 
...        .        / ^"pis '  or  an  cnt oraeti    imi- 


\ 


Bubjection  of  W^  heart,  not  a  '  paralysi 
mouy  of  power. 


l;;, .ii.  ,:i_ 


"THE  RESTITUTION  OP  ALL  THINGS. 


>» 


427 


se  "  IS  incor- 


Ilyfow  here  again  we  must  first  set  aside  the  extraordinary 
view  Mr.  Minton  has  as  to  Gehenna.  Where  does  it  appear 
to  the  apostle  as  on  the  surface  of  the  earth  ?  Certainly 
not  inthe  book  of  Revelation ;  rv^  anywhere  else  so  far  as 
I  am  aware.  Then  the  dead,  he  tells  us,  are  not  in  Gehenna 
"yet."  Quite  triie,  if  we  speak  as  to  the  present.  Bftt  J 
suppose  it'is  not  "  yet  "  that  every  knee  bows.  If  it  be  the 
deJid  tha^  are  to  bow  in  willing  subjection  of  heart  to  Go,d 
before  jiMtoare  yet  in  Gehenna,  then  it  is  hardly  possible  that 
they  «HK<evcr  go  there,  and  universalism,  not  annihila- 
tion, W^rtd  be  true.  But  it  would  scartjely  agree  with 
Scripture  to  blot  out  Gehenna  altogether.  We  mijst  co 
<;lude  then,  that  the  "dead"  do  not  bow  before  Geh 
But  then  cr/i!*??*  Gehenna  there  are  no  deajd  to  bow; 
even  accordii%  to  Mr.  Minton,  those  that  die  the  second 
death  will  not,. and  there  are  no  other  dead  at  all.       ' 

Perhaps  he  will  say,  that  is  not  yet  what  he  means.  Well, 
thert  he  must  mean  that  of  those  now  dead,  every  knee  shall 
in  the  future  *'  bow  " ;  but  that,  in  his  sense  of  bowing,  is 
umpbrsalism  again.  Mr.  Minton  cannot  give  any  meaning 
to  the  words  he  quotes,  consistent  with  annihilation ;  if  the 
subjection  be  subjection  of  heart.  For  if  it  be  living  and 
dead  before  judgment  and  every  knee  shall  bow  before  then, 
the  wicked  dead  will  be  converted  and  saved  beflS'e  they 
are  in  hell  at  all ;  and  if  those  now  dead  are  to  bow  after 
judgment,  they  will  still  be  converted  before  they  are  anni- 
hilated, iand  God  will  annihilate  converted  souls  ;  or  if 
finally  it  be  those  dead  after  the  judgment,  then  as  none  will 
die  in  any  sense  then  but  the  wicked,  still  the  same  result 
follows.  Willing  subjection  of  heart  in  all  the  living  and 
the  dead  is  either  universalism  or  mere  absurdity.  •  s 

But  is  it  willing  subjection  of  heart  that  the  passage 
shows?  Certainly  every  knee  bowing  doeg  not  of  itself 
mean  that.  Nor  does  it  say,  as  Mr.  Minton  piitB  it,  that 
they  bow  to  God  the  Father  at  all.  The  apostle  is  expressly 
speaking  of  the  exaltation  of  the  name  of  Jesnw,  and  it  is 
at  that,  Xatiie  (as  the  context  absolutely  requires)  that  they 


/' 


Mii'^ 


>  ; 


■  ■  i 


m 


■.  f- 


P 


H* 


■^ 


428        FACTS  AND  TnioRIEa  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

bow,  though  it  Ibe  to  God  the  Father's  glory  that  the  Son 
is  thus  Honored.  Mr.  Minton  (with  Jukes  and  others)  ren- 
ders "  in  the  najne,"  hut  there  is  no  need  from,  the. Greek  at 
all,  and  the  context  is  decisive  against  it :  "  lie  hufi  given 
Him  a  name  above  every  name,  that  at  the  name  of  Jesus 

~  every  kn'e^  should  bow  "is  the  only  consistent  reading,  and 
8ubjectiop;.'not  Reconciliation,  and  that  to  Christ  Himself; 
tho  otily  possible  sense.*  ,  '/  '  '  % 

i'hfen  as  to  those  "  under  the  earth "  being  used  for  the. 
dead,  it  is  allowed  that  the  Gfeek  wdrdf  often  means  this; 
but  Mr.  M.  >M1- probably   illow%at  "  infernal "  is  nibre 
exactly  literal,  although  he  may  not  agree  that  this  term 

'should  have  its  modern  meaning.  But  if  beings  in  hearen, 
on  e&rth,  and  under  th^  earth  are  characterized  in  this  way 
at  the  time  they  bow  to  Christ,  and  that  bowing  iteelf  cor- 
responds  (as 'fclcarly'it  must)  to  all  things  being  pht  under . 

>  His  feet,  there  are  then  po  "dead  "to  ,be  covered  by  this   -' 
term,  and  "  infernal "  must^  raein  lost  men  and   spirits  in 
Gehenna,  and  no  others.  -  . 

Thus 'also,  infernal  being  a  third  class  to  heavenly  and 
earthly,  it  does  .not  come  into  the  passages  in  Colossians     . 
and  Ephesiansi  arid  must  be  omitted  from  the  thought  of  the 

.  universe  which  is  found  .in  them,  |  Neither  annihilation  ism  * 
nor  uniyersalistii  can  make  good  their  view  from  texts  like 

these.     -  \ 

Let  US  now  rettim  to  Dr.  Farrar. 

(15.)  2  dftr.'  V.  1^ :  «  To  wit,  that  God  was  in  Christ,  rg- 
conciling  the  world  unto  Himself,  not  imputing  their  tres- 
.  passes  unto  them ;  at^d  hath  committed  unto  us  the  word^f 
"^  ThatTv  reS  ovoua^  mnst  be  '  in  the  name  "  is  a  strange  asser- 
tion to  be  made  for  any  \ne  who  knows  the  flexibility  <\f  Greek  pve- 
pqsitions.  It  would  be  jmUssible  for  a  scholar  saye  under  influences 
which  had  destroyed  his  mfental  capacity,  to  assert  it.  The  text  is  an 
example  of  ^k.  denoting  "  the  occasion/- of  which  Winer  give^  ^^n  ex. 
ample  which  is  quite  i>aralWl  U*  this ;  Acts  rii.  29 ;  f<pvrEy  ^v  to,  * 
Xoya  T6vxfo.  "  then  fled  Moses  ^t  this   saying."    To.  which  maybe 


aclded  Luke  i.  21,  "  marvelled,  that  he  tarried,"  or  "  of  his  tarrying.'    ^ 
"^   -^  xaTajfioyioovr 


A 


"  '    ''  ■  .        ^  '    ,  "      ■'•"' /"'*;-  >  ,   . 

recoDciliation,"    Tbrs  says  nothing  of'resMfty'  nothing  of  how  : 

men  treated  the  Reco^cile^,  or-  how  they  treat  tne  recjon- 
ciling  w^fd.      \.-^     .  .  /l^.  . 

(IC)  Titvii.  11,  12:  ,**  Not  as  in  the  English  version,  bluk^  _. 
^For  the  grace  of  fiod"  hath  appeared,  ^mch  is  ?:tving  to"^ 
all  men  (//'<?<»r;7^io5  Ticidti^  dyOfjcoiroii).^'     This' again  is  not   ■ 
result  but  aspects    "Saving  to  all  "  is  the  grace  which  "has 
.appeared,  that  is  its  character,  but  Jt^es  not  set  aside  the' 
warning  of  the.same  apostle,' ".that  ye  repeive  tiot  t]^e  grace    . ' 
of  God  in  Vain  "  ;*  nor  the  fact  tTiat^e.go^pelis  that  alone 
Vberein  this  grace  is  offered,  and  that  "  he  tK'at  believeth 
not  ^hall  be  condemned."     Salvation,  as  w^e  have  sejenjis  not 
consistBtit  with  such  "  condemhation  '^  but  the  very  opposite  - 

of  it.  '     V,  -  ■  .'       .':/■'  .   '.:'"  ■  /■'  ' '  . "' '■^JT^".  ■' ■■ 

.'(17.)  Heb.  ii.  8,D:  "  Tho« jpst  pk  all"  things  msubjecti^^^ 
under  -His'  feet.    For  |4  that   IJ6 -pilt^aU"  in   sijbjectipB  " 
•itoder  Hmi,  He  left'  nothing  thdt  is  not  jJut  undei;  Him.    Biit 
now  we  see  not  yeVaU  tj||ings  ,put  under  ijitn^  .  But  ,we 
see  Jesus,  wh<^  was '  made  ,^  ^little  lower  than  the,  aflgels. 
.  fo^^ tbe,  suffering'yf  dea^h,  crowned  with  gloi^an^  honor; 
that  He  by  the/grace  of  God^i(or  "rathor /^tupi's  ^^au,  '/pr  ; 
'  emry' ratioirc^lminfli  or  for  eherythin(f\iieut.y  except ^ocV) 
.should^t^-ste ^ath."       •«.  '  '  ,  ,. 

In-  nie  first  place,'  no  editor  of  ,whoih  I  have  any  know- 
ledge authenticates  Dr.  Farrar's  reacling.  It  jsmenlibned 
(as  by  Alferd)  as  found  iii  '*  §ome  an'cient  copies,  versions'and  '. 
fathers/ but  no  one  prefers  it  or  admits  a^^estibn  as  to  it. 
The  ybj^ct  of  the  readipg  "is  of  course  to*  show  that  Ch|ist 
diedaor  angels,  which  is  the  very- thing  ccmtradicted  in'%e 
iBtn  verse  ofthe  same  chapter,  the  truev(EPlion"of  which  is 
^^e  margin  :  "For  verily  He  taketh"  not  hokV of  angels ; 
fUt  of  the  seed  of  Abraham  he  taketh  ifiold,"  i!,e.,  as  result  , 
therefore,  not  even  of  all  nnfii..  Dr.  Farrar's  reading  is  ijk-  • 
gitimke  from  every  point  of  view.  Aa*  to,  the  rest  of  the 
quotation  there  need  lie  no  dispute. 


%■ 


.M^ 


/ 


*  2  Cor.  Ti.  1. 


^^- 


*:'it.. 


'-^- 


. 


I 


430  I     FACtS  AJTD  THEORIES  A8  T6  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

a^8.)  R6v.  «r.  13 :  "  And  every  creature  which  is  in  heav- 
en, and  onHhe  earth,  and  under  the  earth  (vjtoko  ro*  r^s  rhi)y 
and  sucK  a^  are  in  the  sea,  and  all  that  is  in  them,  heard  I 
saying,  Blessing  and  ho^ioj-  and  glory  and  power  be  unto 
Him  that  sitteth  upon  th6  throne,  ai|d  to  thel^amb  forever 
and  ever."  Here  those  ^' under  4.he  earth"  are  a  different 
class  from  those  in  Philippians,  as  the  expression  itself  and 
the  context  shows.  "  On  the  earth  "  and  "  under  the  earth  " 
and  "  in  the  sea  "  are  evidently  so  many  parts  of  the  world 
itself,  in  which  every  created  thing  is  now  vocal  with  praise. 
Similarly— 

(19.)  Rev.  xxi.  4,  5  is  limited  to  the  new  earth;  while— 

(20.)  Rev.  xxii.  3  does  not  necessarily  extend  beyond  the 
Kew  Jerusalem.  »  ': 

This  completes  Ganon  Farrar's  list  of  passages  to  be  con- 
sidered, and  our  review  of  his  book.  I  appre^nd  that' the 
" honest,  serioBts,  and  competent  reader"  to  whom  he  ad- 
dresses himself  will  be  the  last  to  believe  that  he  has  made 
out  his  case.  v 

Before  summing  up  the  results  of  our  inquiry  as  to  the 
two  main  forms  of  the  denial  of  eternal  punishment,  it  will 
be  well  yet  to  consider  the  ethics  of  the  doctrine,  and  as  a 
preliminary  to  this  we  must  give  attention  to  a.  view  of  eter- 
nal punishment  itself  which  has  been  propounded  by  one, 
who  can  by  no  means  be  classed  with  any  of  the  writers  We 
b^ve  hitherto  been  occupied  with.  ^ 


\     r 


<o . 


J- 


'  LI* .  ' 


-v-\- 


MR.  BlttKS'  VIHW. 


431 


f  .  •. 


.    CHABTER  Xtl. 

\    Mr/bIRKS'  VI  kw. 


Mr.  Birks'  view yOf  tbje  doctrine  of  eternal  punishment 
wa&'first  puMished/^bout  twelve  years  since,  in  a  work  en- 
titled, "Tlie  yioiovy  of  Di\;iiie  Goodness,"  antMias .  since 
been  republisheu  in  ip.  revised  foriiPin  the  second  edition  of 
his  "  DifficultJik  of  Belief,'.'  in  which  it 'occupies  the  last  ' 
three  c6ap)rer8.  .  It  is  to  thiJ^  exposition  of  it  I  shall,  of 
coui^e,  exclusively  rol'er  in  my  present  attempt  at  ari  exam-, 

inationjwit.  ;  ,       v 

With  the  first  of  the  three' chapters  in  question  we  have 
notlimg  to  do.    It  is  occupied  with  a  statement^of^ibe-ease- 
as /4^"¥*  *^^  doctrihes^t»f  annihitationlitid^Tf^universal  sal- 
Wtion,  with  every  line  of  whi'ch  I  can  most  fully  an^  heartily 
'/concur.     His  second  chapter  open?  with  a  view  of  the  com-'"^ 
mon  ethical  objections  to  the  orthodox  doctrine,  to  the  con- 
sideration of  which  we  have  ndt  y,et  arrived.     We;  are  still 
occupied  with  the  Scripture  doctrine  itself,  andj|,'  is  only  so 
far  as  Mr.  Birks  deals  .directly  w.ith  this  that '^shall  follow 
him  fti  this  chapter.     Passing  over  all  the  rem  of  his  argu-, 
jnent,  therefore,  we  will  confipe  ourselves  no\^,jto  his  propo- 
sitipns  as  to  eternal  judgment  itself.  *■ - 

And  as  to  the  first  of  these  we  find  ourselves  again  ill  en- 
tire agreement  with  him,  that—  ^*      /• 

"1.  First,  the  second  death  is  not  the^eign  of  Satan  in  ^king- 
dom of  his  own,  in  which  he  xeigns  over  those  whom  he  has 
4eceiYefl,  and  actively  torments  them  forever." 
^We  agree  with  him  that — -  --^'-^^r  -  4t^  ^^  ^-• 
"  there  is  the  widest  contrast  between  the  present  time  of  SataU's 
permitted  activity  and  reign,  and  the  future  season  of  hfe  punish- 
mentr,  when  all  his  power  to  tempt  and  accuse  the  breUiieu,  or  to 
reign  over  evil  men,  will  have  ceased  forever.     It  js  not  strange, 


-*■— : 


A^:; 


,  \.  i 


\ 


432        FACTS  AND  THE0BIE8  AS  TO  A  FUTUBE  STATE. 

but  natural  and  certain,  that  sinners  should  have  less  freedom  for 
active  wickedness  under  the  fiery  anger  of  God  tlian  in  the  time 
of  His  forbcaraueo  and  long-Hufferi|%,  Nothing  can  be  more  , 
monstrous  than  the  notion  tliat,  undi*r  the  holy  eye  and  right- 
eous hand  of  the  Supremo  Judge,  they  cah  and  will  rebel  more- 
freely  and  fiercely  than  ever  before.  Such  a  prison,  in  which 
criminals  should  be  allowed  to  cultivate  tlieir  o^yu  wicked  habits 
and  practices  to  the  uttermost,  would  be  a  foul  i-eproach  to  any 
earthly  government.  Sow  great,  then,  must  be  the  evil  of  bring- 
ing this  charge,  witlioijit  the  least  grain  of  Scripture  evidence, 
nay,  in  the  teeth  of  its  express  statements,  against  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Righteous  and  Eternal  King  !  " 

Mr.  Birks'  tsecond  pfb|iosition  is  that —  < 

"  2.  Again,  the  la,st  judgment  and  the  second  death  are  one 
main  part  in  a  wise^  holy,  and  pex'fect  work  of  the  God  of  love. 
".  .  «  The  issues  of  judgment,  however  solemn,  must  be  such  that 
the  All-wise,  "whose  understanding  is  unsearchible,  the  All-good, 
whose  tend^r^  mercies  are  over  all  his  works,  c'an  not  only  acqui- 
esce in  them,  but  oven  rejoice,  in  them  with  a  deep  complacency 
of  divliie  love.  .  .Now  this  revealed  p<Mfection  of  the  Whole 
work  of  God,  when  we  reflect  on  it  calmly,  must  throw  a  steady 
light  on  this.mysterious  and  solemn  subject  of  the  second  death. 
The  first  deaCh  is  God's  last  and  greatest  enemy.     It  may  be 

.bdme  with  for  a  time,  bnt  its  continuance  would  be  a  fatal  bar- 
rier to  the  dominion  and  glory  Of  the  Most  High.  *  God  is  not 
the  God  of  the  dead  but  of  the  living. '  And  hence  that  indignant 
sentence — *0  death,  I  will  be  thy  plagues  ;  O  grave,  I  wiU  be 

"thy"  destruction. '  But  the  second  death  proceeds  directly  from 
the  appointment  of  tiie  Supreme  Judge  who  is  perfect  both  in 
wisdom  and ,  goodneas.  Ho^vever  terrible  and  solemn,  it  is  his 
divine  remedy  for  all  that  is  most  fearful  and  appalling  in  the  ac- 
tual or  possible  evil  of  a  fallen  and  rebellieius  universe.  .  .  ^hq 
attempt  to  deepeii  its  terrors  by  heaping  up  all  kinds  of  moral 
and  spiritual  horrors,  the  unchecked  ravings  of  fiendish  malice, 
the  blasphemous  utterances  of  raging  desjjair,  and  to  see  in  it  the 
stereotyped  continuation  of ■  rebellion,  hatred  and  blasj)hemy  for- 
ever, is  to  reverse  and  deny  the  revealed  object  and  aim  of  the 
work  of  Christ. — 'For  this  purpose  was  the  Son  of  God  mani-- 
fested,  that  he  might  destroy  the  works  of  the  devil.*  Tlio  grand 
purpose  of  the  jiulgrjaent  which  ho  will  execute  can  never  be  to 


illl.   BIHK8'  VIEW.  ^ 


433 


God  mamL- 


sterebtype  and  eternize  active  reh(illion  against  God,  but  to  abol- 
isli  it  Un"  vvvvvaoh." 

Now  hero  rtt^altji  tliere  ih  nilu-li  of  truth'  that  needs  to  be 
reiiicmbcrGd.  "Slii  Bh'ks'  system,  liow^evcr,  begins  to  appear 
in  the  exaggeration  ()f  the  contrasfc  between  the  -first  and- 
the  second  death.'  'That  they  are  ccmtrasted  has  been, 
already  insisted  on.  .Type  and  antitype,  which  is  the  rela- 
tion in  which  they  stand  to  one  another,  are  always  more  oi* 
less  Gonthists.  That  the  first  death,  Juoreover,  would  in  its 
continuance  be  fatal  tojthe  4ulfilment  of  this  divine  pug^e, 
whether  for  saint  or  sinner,  is  simple  and  sure  enough.  As 
the  infrjp^ement  of  the  creative  plaij.  it  can  but  fulfil  a  tei 
porary  purpose  &nd  must  eventually  pass  aWay ;  and  the 
second  death  caunOt  be,  therefore,  the  repetition,  of'^  it. 
The  resurrection  which  introduces  the  latter  is  the  close  of 
the  former;  and  deatl^  is  the  last  enemy,  in  tliis  way,  to  be 
destroyed.  >     •  "  ,       \ 

But  if  the'last  enemy,  is  it  "  the  greatest "  ?  l/there  any 
wai'rant  for  jqpposing  it  ?/i  moral  character  atid  design  to  the 
final  judgment?  Surely  no^e :  in  fact  the. very  opposite. 
It  is,  just  as  the  second  is,  '•  th^^appointi^^yOf  the  Supreme 
Judge  who' is  perfect  both  in  wisdom  and  goodness."  Nay, 
the  Lord's  parable  of  the  rich  nian  ^ri  hadfes  gives  us  a  vie^w 
of  the  first  death  which  (as  related  to  tho  lost)  .resemble^'so 
closely  the  second,  that  jnany  have  confikimded'  them.  There 
is  noT  the  least  warrant  for  giving/to  the  first  deatk  t^e 
character  of  »/^ora?  evil  which  Ave  shsrtl  find  Mif^Birks  attach- 
ing to  it  still  more  plainly  in  the  si^uel.  '* 

Again,  does  he  nOt  go  too  far  in  deciding  that  the"  secoud 
death  will  work  any  moral  change  In  those  who. are  subject  • 
to  it?  That  it  willvnot  "  steiv/otype  and  eternize /active  re- 
bellion against  God"  is  no  d<>ubt  true.  That  it.wiU  change 
"hatred"  into  "^u'ght  else/ must  be  proved  rither  than 
asserted.     The  subjectigi/  of  "  infernal  beings  "  -  i^  clearly 

taught. Every  knee  sha/l  bow  to  Christ,  and  every  tongue 

confess  that  he  is  Lorcl ;  that  is  true,  for  Scripture  affirms 
it.     "  The  loorks  of  tbfe  devil "  shall  be  destroyed,  but  noi* 


.<  ■.*' 


^^\ 


.•..).'■ 


434         FACTS  AKD  THEOHIES  A8  TO  A  ^UTUBE  STATE. 

his  character  changed.  Were  it  so,  it  would  naturally  seem 
that  universalism  ipuBt  be  the  true  view ;  for  if  the  hcUitti 
of  all  wore  subject,  eternal  punishment  "would  be  a  raon 
strosity;  for  it  is  not"  based  upon  the  infinite  guilt  already 
contracted,  but  U[p<)n.  the- />er«<tf<<inc//  of  moral  cliamctir. 
.  "  He  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still,  and  he  that  is 
filthy,  let  him  be  filthy  still."*  Apart  from  all  (juestions  of 
X3xact  demerit,  could  the  God  whom  Scripture  reveals  pur 
sue  with  everlasting  rigor  those  who  had  been  brotight  int( 
heartfelt  subjection  to  His  will  ?  . 

Mr,  Birks'  third  proposition  is —  '     * 

"3.  The  doom  of  tlioJost,  wo  are  furtlier  tnught,  will  be  the  ob- 
ject of  acquiescence  and  holy  conteraplntiou  ou  the  piii-t  of  all  tht- 
unfalleu  and  redeemed.  .  .  .  That  doom,  however  solenm,  can 
—  hardly  be  one  of  uuminyled  horror  and  darkness,  much,  less  of 
unbounding  and  etornal  blasphemy,  which  is  the  object  of  com- 
placency and  holy  adoration  to  saints  and  augels,  free  from  all 
taint  of  mere  selfi.shuoss,  and  moulded  into  the  full' and  perfect 
resemblance  of  the  divine  love."  - 

The   question   could   scarcely,  be   seriously  raised  as  to 
whether  the  act  s  of  Him  whose  ways  are  perfect  will  be  .the 
object  of  complacency  to  creatures  brought  into  His  moral  ' 
likeness.     *'  Their  happiness  is  not,"  indeed,  "  made  to  de- 
pend either  on  their  ignorance  or  their  Ibrgetfulnes's  of  the 
doom  of  the  lost."     Nor  need  we  suppose  that  doom  to  be 
"  unuiingled  horror  ami   darkness,"  if  by  that   is  meant  a  • 
doom  which  would  itself  be  an  evil,  rather  than  onCvdesi^ed  , 
for  the  repression  of  evil.     To  the  very  lost  themselves,  it 
is  not  inconceivable,  that  that  repression  in  itself  should  be 
a  good— the  only  one,  it  may  be,  which  remains  a  possibility 
^in  their  case.  V 

"4.  Fourthly,  on  the  day  of-  judgment  the  lioiior  due  even  to 
the|  wicked  as  God's  creatures,  and  gifted  by  Him  with  high  and 
noble  powers,  will,  in  some  way  or  other,  be  still  recognized  by 
the  righteous  Judge." 


Mr.  Birks  applies, here  the  principle  of  Gen.   ix.  6  and 


*  Rev.  xxii.  11. 


MR.    BIIIKS'    VIEW. 


485 


en.  ix.  6  and 


Deut.  XXV.  2,  3j^and  seems  to  intimate  that  Christ  as  Judge 
will  respect  the  divine  image  in  man  and  the  brotherhood 
of  all  hunianity  by  some  "moftsurement"  or  even  "mitiga- 
tion "  of  what  might  be  the  exact  due.  He  does  not  posi- 
tively say  this,  however ;  and  we  must  not  say  it  for  him. 
"They  were  judged  every  man  according  to  their  works" 
is  what  Scripture  says.     We  can  say  nothing  else. 

"  5.  Once  more,  the  List  judgment  is  the  work  of  God's  mercy  as 
well  as  of  Hisjudiciid  rightt'ousness.     Tliis  is  plainly  taught  us 
in  those  striking  and  impressive  words  of  tlie  Psiiknist— '  Also 
unto  thee,  O  Lord,  belongelh  mercy;  for  thou  renderest  to 
every  man  according  to  his  works.'    In  the  judgment  of  the  right- 
eous it  is  easy  to  see  and  feel  the  truth  of  this  whispered  message 
of  God.  .  .  Can  it  be  true,  even  of  the  souls  that  perish,  that 
there  is  mercy  in  that  sentence  which  dooms  them  to  the  lake  of  ' 
fire  ?    The  deep  thought  which  Plato  dimly  apprehended  by  the 
light  of  nature,  seems  here  to  receive  a  direct  sanction  from  the 
Spirit  of  God.     Punishment  is  set  l>ofore  us  in  the  light  of  a 
divine  medicine  for  the  diseases  of  the  soul.     Compared  with  that\ 
most  awful  of  curses,  that  evil  should  be  left  to  work  out  fully  its  ' 
own  terrible  issues  in  the  darkness  of  utter  banishment  from  the 
divine  presence,  even  the  justice  of  God,  however  severe,  is  medi 
cinal  to  guilty  sinners.     Their  d  iom  is  awful,  but  a  world  aban- 
doned to  the  reign  of  unrestrained  and  triumphant  wickedness 
would  be  still  more  awful.     The  abyss,  a  bottomless  pit,  bound 
less  in  its  breadth  and  depth  and  insatiable  in  its  craving,  is  to 
be  destroyed  and  abolished  by  the  power  of  the  Redeemer.     The* 
revealed  scene  of  judgment  is  not  a  sea,  an  ocean  or  abyss,  but 
simply  a  lake  of  fire.    It  is  mercy  to  the  wicked  to  deny  them  the 
fatal  power  of  adding  sin  to  sin.    It  is  mercy  to  keep  them  from  the 
power  of  tormenting  c@h  other,  by  the  free  indulgence  of  their 
own  sinful  and  hateful  passions.     It  is  mercy  to  force  them  back, 
even  though  captive  and  in  chains,  to  the  presence  of  that  infi- 
nite goodness,  from  which  their  own  rebelhous  hearts  would  lead 
them  farther  and  farther  away,  till  they  should  Iq^  themselves 
deeper  and  deeper  in  delusion  and  darkness  foi;fev 

I  have  not  quoted  all  this  for  the  sakVof  opposing  it 
There  is  much  in  it  suggestive,  much  thi£'  would  seem  as 
atijeast  probably  true.     Whether  it  be  thoVal  meaninij  of 


«JSj, 


-w. 


r. 


A  ;  ^ 

'  ^  (I      ^ 


*r 


"% 


'  «f 


§y 


ii.i  - 


436         FACTS  AND  TfiEOKlES  AS  TO  A  FUTL'HB  STATE. 

the  psalm  is  another  question  ;  and  if  we  read  it  in  connec- 
tion we  shall  perhaps  har<lly  agree  that  the  thought  of  racJrcy 
to  the  wicked  shown  in  jihignient  itself  is  what  it  speaks 
of*  Yet  the  principle  need  nOt  on  that  account  he  untru^ 
and  be  it  mercy  to  the  lost  or  not,  it  is  assuredly  mercy  to 
the  unfallen  and  redeemed,  that  evil  should  be  repressed. 
But  Mr.  Birks'  texts  can  hardly  therefore  prove  what  be 
quotes  them  for.  The  radical  error  in  his  view  is  exhibited 
iO  his  next  proposition.      -  —  -*^ — 


"  6,  Again  the  second  death  is  a  sequel  of  a  resurrection,  but  a 
resurrection  ',,  to  shame  and  everlut^ing  contemi>t '  (Dan.  xii.  2). 
It  thus  involves  in  its  very  nature  contrasted  elements.  For 
resurrection  is  a  work  of  redemption,  a  triumph  over  death,  and 
a  fruit  of  the  atoning  work  of  the  world's  Redeemer.  But  a  re- 
surrection tdVsliame  and  contempt  must  alsr^^^  bp.  a  perpetual  mani- 
festation of  .t^  creature's  morrtl  emptiness,  in  contrast  to  tlio 
immutable  and  glorious  perfection  of  Him  who  is  the  Only  Wisr , 
and  the  Only  Good."  »„-"<       v 

I  have  already  questioned  the  application  of  this  pjsssage 
in  Daniel  to  literal  resurrection  ;  but  that  concerns  us  very 

•  little  here,,  since   evidently  the   resurrection   of  judgment 

_  would  answer  the  purpose  of  Mr.  Birks'  argument  equally 
well  with  that  in  Daniel.     But  the  resurrection  of  judgment 

'  cannot  be  shown  to  be  a  work  of  rederaptr6n  of  a  fruit  of 
atonement.  It  is  Christ's  work  doubtless,  but  not  as  re- 
deeming; nor  are  the  finally  lost  ever  the  redeemed.  For 
the  saints  and  for  no  others  is  resurrection  "  the  adoption, 
the  redemption  of  the  body.*!  For  no  others  is- it  ''a.  tri- 
umph over  death.'t  The  purpose  of  God  a.s  to  man  indi- 
cated in  creation,  could  not  bo  intended  permanently  to  be 
Bet  aside  by  death,  and  the  preservation  of  the  spirit  in  death 
implies  the  resurrection  of  the  body  from  the  grave.     The 

^:  resurrection  of  which  Christ  was  fiist'-fruits  is  a"  resurrec- 
tion from  wnonf/  the  dead."  This  is  a  "  reVlemption,"  and 
this  alone.  . . 


♦  I  have  before'given  very  briefly  my  own  thought, 
t  Rom,  viii.  23.  t  ^  ^o*"-  ^^'-  5^''>'^' 


\ 


» 


.1 


MR.   BIRKS'    vCeW. 


437 


L  in  connoc- 


Thcre  are  no  "contrasted  elements  "  therefore  in  the  re- 
surrection of  judgment.     That   it  is  on  the  other  hand  a 


"  perpetual  manifestation, 
and  a  needed  one,  thcr 
suggests  at  least,  that 
and  make  His  power  R 
of  wrath  fitj,ed  to  destrnc 


creature's  moral  emptiness," 

c  no  doubt.     The  apostle 

illing  to  show  His  wrath, 

wKh  regard  to  "the  vessels 

and  Fie  who  dolighteth  in 


mercy  must  have  recognized  a  governmental  ffecessity  for 
this.     And  thus  we  may  believe, with  Mr.  Birk.s,  that  "their 
^   Bolemn  doom,  though  no  result  of  the  choice  of  the  Moit 
*'  ttigh,  whose  love  has  displayed  itself  to  the  utmost  in  sol- 
J?erdn  warnings  to  deter  sinners  from  the  path  of  ruin,  may  yet 
be  the  object  of  His  deep  and  holy  acquicpceneo  " ;  whether 
or  not  we  are  able  to  belieyc  with  him  that  the  reason  is 
''because  in  this  way  alone  a  ransomed  universe  can  bo  up- 
hold forever  in  a  blessedness  based  on  perfect  humility,  and 
capable  on  ttot  very  account  of  enlarging  and  unfolding 
itself,  without  risk  of  fresh  apostasy,  (or  ^wjft?**^"  , 

This  closes  Mr.  Birks'  second  chapter,  rtw^vhat  he  con- 
siders the  "  direct  fand  open  lessons  "  of  the  Bible  on  this 
rmbject.  These  dirfect  teachings  have  c»^rtainly  carried  us 
no  further  than  this,  that  the  final  (loom  of  the  wicked  in- 
\olves  their  enforced  subjection  In  Ood.V  That  it  caniiot 
consist  with  active  rebellion  is  Vpiite  true -and  important, 
also.  That  there  is  an  absolute  need  for  it,  looked  at  fr.oin 
the  side  of  mercy  as  well  as  •  righteousness,  is  still  true 
And  that  in  some  sense  it  may  be  mercy  eve%to  the  lo 
themselves  we  have  conceded  likewise.  So  far  we  can  go 
no  further.  What  we  believe  Mr.  Birks  has  not.shown, 
cannot  show,  is  that  punishment  of  this  kind  is  in  any  se 
a  redemptive  or  restorative  process,— the  only  proper  resu 
of  which  would  surely  be  .w  end  of  the  punishment  itielf. 
•This  he  does  not  believe  in,  although  a  mitigation  of  the 
punishment  he  does  seem  to' suppose.     I  cannot .  seei  that 

either.     Oertainly  the// texts 


se 
ult 


Scripture  gives  oven  a  hint  of 


we  have  thus  far  looked  at  do  not. 

■    ■   ■-  ,"^  ""^  : ~ 7 '      ;/    '^  Rom.  ixT 2'2. 


^^00^' 


I    \ 


|: 


^;'V 


lilt ! 


Sit 


9.' 


/ 


438         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  A^  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

But  Mr.'ISirks  beliovos  that  "  the  l^ew  Testament  throws 
further  and  perhaps  still  clearer  light  on  thissolemn  truth 
of  eternal  punishment,  when  we  look  below  the  surface,  and 
strive  to  combine  the  indirect  with  the  direct  and  open 
lessons  which  its  sacred  messages  convey."     And  here— 

"1.  Every  created  being  may  be  viewed  in  two  different 
aspects,  persional  and  federal,  or  what  it  is  of  itself,  and  its  char- 
acter as  part  of  a  greater  whole.  This  Avarp  and  woof  runs 
through  the  whole  of  Scripture,  and  occasions  a  frequent  an- 
•  tithpiis  in  its  stjitemcnts  of  divine  truth.  Thus  '  in  Atlam  all  die,' 
and  still  '  the  soid  thtet  siiineth,  it  shall  die.'  In  Christ '  all  shall 
be  made  alive,'  and  still  it  is  to  those  who  by  pa'tient  continuance 
in  well  doing  seek  for  glory,  honor,  and  immortality,  that  God 
will  render  eternal  life.  The' charge  to  the  Galatians,  '  Bear  ye 
one  another's  burdens,  and  so  fulfil  the  law  of  Christ,'  is  followed 
at  once  by  an  oppbsite  statement,  as  the  attendant  moral  caution, 
'  For  every  one  shall  bear  his  own  burden.'  .  .  The  same  contrast, 
wherever  selfishness  is  not  complete,  is  foundby  experience  in  the 
elements  which  constitute  human  happiness  and  misery,  joy  and 
sorrow.  In  part  they  are  purely  «knd  simply  personal,  but  in  part 
they  arise  from  sympathy  with  the  joys  or  sorrows  of  others.nor 
from  the  contemplation  of  truths  ^ot  personal,- but  <*jectiveand 

universal "  .  i.    * 

"Now  all  the  statements  of  Scripture  with  respect  to  the  future 
doom  in  judgment  of  the  righteous  and  the  wicked;  have  direct 
reference  to  personal  conduct  and  personal  -retribution,  the 
federal  aspect,  in  these  passages,  do^^  not  appear.  .^.,,.  But  this 
truth,  however  solemn,  and.however  inwrought  into  the  doctrine 
of  man's  personal  responsibility,  cannot  exclude  a  fi^ther  truth, 
namely,  the  federal  relation  of  all  mankind  to  the  Creator  of  the 
universe,  and  to  Christ,  the  Head  of  every  man.,  the  Saviour  of 
the  world,  who  gave  Himself  a  ransom  for  all  men.  ,  One  of  these 
truths  is  no  less  deeply  inwrought  into  the  texture  of  God's  word 
than  the  other.  It  must  reveal  its  reality  and  it^powe];^n  some 
way  or  other,  amidst  all  the  solenm  and  tremendous  realities  of 
the  coming  judgment. "  .  *^ 

Mr.  Birksmust  surely  feel  that  that  assertion  is  vague 
enough  at  least.  The  difficulty  in  dealing  with  it  is  pre- 
cisely  Its  vagueness.     And  yet  is  it  after  all  too  defiflite  in 


X 


5IK.   BIRKS'   VI'EW. 


439 


s  realities  of 


supplying  what^Scripture,  as  it  should  seem  for  some  good 
reason,  entirely  ignores.  He  owns  that  the  federal  aspect 
docs  not  appear  in  the  passages  whlcli  speak  (^future  judg- 
ment. He  must  own  4hat  whereas,  for  instance,  the  "  bear 
ye  one  another's  burdens  "  (which  he  calls  that),  applies  to 
the  present  life,  the  assurance  as  to  the  future  is  strictly 
personal:  "every  one  .shall  bear  his  own  burden.''  Is  it 
allowable  to  say  that  a  certain  "truth"  must  reveal  its 
reality  ^d  power  in  regard  to  that  from  which  Scinpture 
seems  to  exclude  it  altogether  ?  Doubtless^  the  Creator  of ' 
the  universe  w'll  not  forget  even  in  judgment  that  men  are 
the  creatures  oi  Ills  Iiund  ;  and  Christ  the  Ih^ad  of  all  men, 
it  to  whom  all  judgment  is  committed  because  He  is  the  Son 
^  gCMan,*  will  not  Ibrget  His  own  humanity.  But  it  is  vain 
to  brirfg  this  in  to  modify  in  any  way  the  pc^itive  statements* 
of  the  word.  It  is  not  as  Saviour  of  the  li'orld,  that  He 
takes  His  place  upon  the  throne  of  judgment;  nor  can  the 
"ransom  for  aR"  avail  anymore  for  those  adjudged  to 
Gehenna.  Mr.  Birks  does  not,  I  suppose,  think  that  it  can; 
yet  it  is  hard  to  say  why  he  brings  in  thoughts  that  are  in- 
congruous to  his  subject.  For  the  judged,  through  their 
own  wilfulness,  the  ransom  has  not  availed.  Had  it  done 
i^o,  they  had  not  been  judged.  Salvation  Mjitcondenmation 
lire  opposed  in  terms,  and  to  argue  as  if  tnosc  condemned 
were  still  in  some  fractional  measure  saved,  is  at  least  to 
suppose  that  Scripture  jias  Ueen  deficielit  in  not  saying  so 
and  to  assume  A  competency  to  make  up  the  deficiency. 

"2.  yecoudly,' the  second  death  is  a  work  of  the  God  of  truth, 
by  which  pride  and  falsehood-are  to  be  abolished  out  of  the  moral 
universe.  .  .  The  fire,  prepared  for  the  de^^landhis  angels,  mnst 
l>e  the  destruction  of  guilty  pride,  when  it  has  become  in  a  man- 
ner coiisubstantiate  with  the  spirit,  and  can  be  overcome  in  no 
geiitler  way  than  by  the  ever-enduring  strokes  of  tlivint'  judg- 
ment.    '  Them  that  walk  in  pi^de  he  is  able  to  abase.'  " 

""Only  it  is  .hard  to.  say  how  far  pride  is  "  abolished  "  out 
of  the  lieart,  when  it  iieeila  such  "  ever-enduring  strokes  "  to 

*  Jolin  Y.  '27. 


#' 


/ 


440        PACTS  AKD  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PTTTURE  STATE. 

keep  it  down.     For  my  part  I  can  accept  the  former  state- 
ment, wlieu  interpreted  by  the  latter. 

"  3F  Thirdly,  tlio  second  death  is  u  work  of  the  God  of  love, 
wherein  Hft  displays  His  holy  anger  against  every  sinner  whose 
heart  and  life  have  been  marked  by  utter  selfishness,  and  the  en- 
tiro  absence  of  genuine  love  to  God  and  men." 

I  can  have  nothing  to  object  to  this.  . 

"  4.  Fourthly,.tho  resurrection  to  judgment,  Uke  the  resurrec 
tion  of  life,  isW^imrt  of  the  redeeming  work  of  Christ." 

This  is  a  former  statement,  and  the  main  one  of  the  whole. 
It  is  here,  however,  mor^  fully  argued  o®  and  we  shall 
agam  look  at  it.     He-says — 

"The two  main  issues  of  judgment,  howe^»eat  their  con-    ; 
trast,have  one  feature  common  to  both.     Th%  follow  a  resur- 
•rection.     Hence  the  apostle  jinites  th^pi  in  one  common,  state- 
ment, before  he  marks  the  contrast  between   'them  that  are 
Christ's, '  <,and  all  others.    '  For  since  by  man  came  death,  by  man 
came  also  the  re^^rrection  of  the  dead.     For  as  in  Adam  all  die, 
even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive.'    The  first  death  m 
every  case  haa  come  through  the  sin  of  Adam.     The  hfe-restoring 
resurrection  is  to  come  in  every  case  through  the  po^yer  and  work 
of  the  second  tdatn,  the  Lord  from  heaven.     The  judgment  Of 
the  lost  is  based  on  a  present  work  of  the  Redeemer,  in  wluch 
they  share  with  the  saved,  and  on  a  victory  over  death,  wrought 
by  Christ,  and  depending  on  the  power  of  His  atoning  sacrifice 
.and  resurrection  from  the  dead.     Their  bodies  are  restored  from 
%e  earlier  dominidli  of  the  grave,  and  the  dominion  of  death,  so 

far,  is  wholly  abolished  "  ^ 

f -  But  Mr.  Birks  makes  no  sufficient  distinction  between  the 
resurrection  of  judgnvent  and  the  resurrection  of  life,  of  the 
.  latter  t)f  wliicb  the  Chapter  from  which^  he  quotes  through-  . 
out  speaks.  Had  lie  begun  his  q^tation  a  little  earlier  he 
would  have  sQ.en  that  the  apostle,  instead  of  beginning  with 
a  general  statement  of  resurrection  which  would  imj^dde 
both  jjplasses  of  the  dead, /rs^  of  all  speaks  ".ofth^  that 
'♦  sleep  »^  in   Jesus,  of  whom   (and  of   whom^^^)  He  is 


dead 


"first-fruits." — *'  But  now  is  Christ  rl.scn  from  tho 

become  the  first-fruits  of  them  that  sleep."     Tliese  sleepers 


iS 


g.r 


-••A 


«8,''. 


MIL    BIUKH'   view. 


441 


are  not  all  the  dead.  They  are  those  fo?  whom  <^atb  has  been  - 
annulled,  and  changesljnto  a  refreshment  and  rest  only  from 
cares  and  conflicts  of  this  life  in  artticipation  of  the  endless 
mornin-.  Of  ?Ae/r  resurrection  is  Christ  the  first-frUits,  for 
they 'alone  are  raised  in  "  the  ir(>^ge  of  the  heavenly ''—the 
Lord  from  heaven ;  and  »  if  |lie  first-f V^t  he  holy,  the  lump  is 
also  holy/'*  It  is«mpossihle  to  make  Christ  in  any  sense 
the  "tirst-fruits"  ofthelost. 

But  then  this i^rfAs^  what  ]VJkJ5irks  calls  the  "common 
statement,"  which  is  appended  to  liT:^  -for  since  hy  man 
came  death,  hy  man  <5ihe  also  the  resurrection  of  the  deacL; 
for  as  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  he  made 

alive  " 

Now  are  all  men  "in  GJiYist"  to  be  thus  quickened  or 
made  alive  by  Him  ?     Let  any  one  compare  ScfTpture,  and 
see  if  there  be  a  doubt.t     Na^  ISh'.  Constable  has  long  ago 
been  reminding  us  that  l^he  very  word  used  here  for  -  made , 
aHve"  is .  expressly  the  word,^  used   by  the   same   apostle, 
where- he  confines  it  to  the  saints  :  "  //'  the  Spirit  of  Him 
that  raised  up  Jesus  from  the  dei^l  dwell  in  you,  He  that 
raised  up    Christ   from  the   dead,  shall  ^\^o ^quicken  your 
mortal  hodkt^  by  {pt  ratfer,  because^/)  His  Spirit  that 
dwelleth  in  you."    Thus  although  the  wicked  will  surely  rise, 
the  apostle  will  not  call  that  "quickening"  or  ".life-giving," 
which  is  not  the  resurrection  pflifc^^  And  we  are  doubly 
"^  told  that  "  aU  in  Christ "  are  n6t  all  men  universally. 

Even  where  he  says  "in  Adam  all  die,"  although  that  is' 
true  abstractedly  of  at  hianblnd,  the  whole  context  at  least 
(if  not  the  construction  also)  would  seem  to  necessitate  the 
limiting  it 'to  those  of  whom  the  apostle  has  just  been  speak- 
ing, '''now  is  Christ  risen  from  the  dead,  and  become  the 
fir'st-friiits  of  them  that  sleep  ;*  for  since  Ky  man  came  death;" 
and  thus  theyare  dead,  "byman  came  also  ^he  resurroc- 
tion  of  the  dead,"  and  they  shall  live ;  "  for 


€»■ 


as  in  Adam 


^^■ 


*  Rom.  xi.  16. 

* 

1»"                     "'                                                                                                  ■■ 

+  Rfim.  viii.  1  :  xii.  5;  xvi.  7  ; 

i  Cor.  i.  2,30; 

XV.  18;  2Cor.  i.  21;            ,'             H 

V.  17  ;  xii.  2 ;  Gal.  i.  22,  etc. 

. 

•  "'■         H 

• 

--'■  :     .;■••*?■  ■  •■■  1 



, „,-■  ._.^-fl_.l_. "-;--  —  -    -    — ------ 

-    -    -      -  -^    '--^    -r--     - 

n'"- ■  -*~^---^^-^-''^^^ 

^  . 

'PWl 

■     '"    '  •     4- 

■:i 


Hl- 


; 


iii 


t  t'l 


:'■:■:'■:,:<::       ■         %     />".;-^  •;■:■•■:: 

442        FACTS  InD  TUEOBIEa  AS  TO  A  JUTUBB  OTATH.        *       v 

thoy  »n  die,  evea  eo  in'  Chri,t  ehaU  they  »n  be-  made    . 

"'xtL  is  not  the  least  ground  ^^^^^^^^  . 
•f  he  lost  share  with  the  saved  in  what  is  the  frnitwf  atone 
m™t  or  a^made  alive  in  Christ  as  raised  from  the  dead. 
?      ' :;  W^t  forth  by  His  power  to  i^^gmen*-^  J-^g- 
mnnt  and  not  srace,  claims  their  n,sarreet.on.    It  may  dis- 
Ty //^  v°lry  ov;r  death,  bnt  is,  in  nowise  «A«r,.    It  .s 
not  a  fHyi-resurrection  but  ai,«?3".«(-resurreotion. 
Mr.  Birks  reads  the  lesson  of  that  judgment^resnrreot.o» 

"  "  In  the  first  death  the  dissolution  of  the  body,  and  its  corrap- 
In  the  "St  "en  ^j  ^j^^  ^  „„so 

"T'"";S^^fr    when  HW  wandered  or  was  driven  away 

CXpr    enc   M  H^  who  is  tight  and  Love.    And  when 
^om  tne  presents  ^^.^  correspondence 

the  dead  are  ^-^^  ^^'^  1^^^^^^  heU  are  cast  into'thejake 

TTl  ^'^IT^IT^^^  can  remain  no  longer  under 
of  fire,  the  souls,  even  oi  ^^         *  ^^^^ 

the  curse  of  utter  vanity.     Thej  vill  glo     y  ^^^ 

amidst  the  fires  of  penal  judgment.   ^«  ^^"^^ '^^^^^^ 
pn«l  for  which  every  creature  was  made.     If  the  dealings  oi  vrou 
end  tor  wmcii  CYC  J  „i,  „«*«.  4„«tifv  a  charge  of  unnatural 

with  iinv  creature  were  such  as  ta  justiiy  a  cu»ig    , .       .  . 

rrueuTor  excessive  and  needless  severity,  God  could  not  po^.- 
bly  be  riorified  thereby,  but  rather  the  divine  g  ory  wouM  be  ob^ 
senred  deeply  elouded,  or  blotted  out  and  whoUy  destroyed.  To 
ZuvoJthrough  shame  and  punishment,  compa«=d  w>th  the 
bSs  of  The  redeemed  and  holy,  must  be  an  infinite  and  nrrepara- 
bSor  But  to  glorify  Him  in  any  way,  bowevef  «,lemn  and 
^ouS;,l  when  contrast  with  the  reign  of  that  death,  whieU  is 
pri^enemT  and  the  enrse  of  eternal  vanity,  darkne^,  and  cor- 

fn;ti:rz'^.  -» *<>  ^^^^t-VX^ "      '^' 

baps  even  in  some  respects,  an  infinite  gam. 

Thus  in  Mr.  Birks'  view,  the  judgment  which  comes  ator 
death,  is  really,  and  perhaps  infinitely,  better  than  the 
derth  which  precedes  it!  The  usual  comparative  estimate 
'nhe  two  is  here  reversed.  Death  is  «,mparativcly  the 
■  °,.r»e.  judgment  the  blessmg!  The  proof  will  need  to  be 
— "nrse,  jwife       — ...  ^„..._  „„„„.„  hpliave  th  B. — What  is 


^nrse,  judgment  the  Diessing.     x..^  t-.— ■ 
convincing  that  will  bring  many  to  believe  ^this. 
il~  Birks' proof  ?    It  is  here—     ■  , 


1^ 


■''f^.: 


0     r 


I'f 


MB.'  BIRKS*  VIEW. 


443 


« '!nie  dissolution  of  the  body,  aiid  its  eornjption,  was  only  the  ^ 
type,  sign,  and  parable  of  the  deeper  cu*e  resting  op  the  spirit,  » 
whe;i  it  had  wandered  or  was  driven  away  frdm  the  presence  of 
Him  who  is  Light  and  :^ve.     And  when  the  dead  are  raised  by 
the  power^of  qhrist,  this  corrgspgndence  cannot  wholly  cease. " 

That  is,  when  the  typejs  gone,  the  thing  typified  must 
be  gone  witb'it.  But  to  what  state  then  does  "  where  their 
worni  dieth  not "  apply  ?  there  is  the  very  figure  qf  death  ^ 
and  corruption.  It  should  apply,  according  to  Mr.  Birks,  to 
the  intermedrate  state  alone. <lY"et  I -think  he  wiU  hardly 
^ny  that  it  applies"  to  the  finalr-Gehenna  beingnexpres^y 
named."  That  is,  the  figures  drawn  from  death  are  applied 
expressly  whete  accojdhig  to  him  they  should  not  and  could 

not  be.  r 

And' is  the  soiil  of  the  W  naore  away  from  the  presence  - 
of  God  in  death  than  in  hell  ?    Wha^.ie-the  flame  in  which 
the  rich  man  is  tormented  ?    What  is  the  place  of  w^hich  the 
Psalmist  says,  "  If  I  make  Ihy  bed  in  sheol,  behold.  Thou  art 
there  "  ?    What  is  it  which  the  Preacher  annqimces  wjien 
X  he  says,  "  the  spirit  shall  veturn  to  God  who  ga  JS^^- '  ?    ^^ 
distanpe  frolS  God  si^fite  locality,  or  moral  conditPSS  rather,? 
If  the  latter  be  at  least  the  essential  part,  will  reswrectioii. 
bring  the  lost  soul  in  py  mlWre  back  to  ^od,  as  it  should,^ 
if  type  and  antitype  are  to  cdS^spond  synchronically  f 

Again,  are  those  "  no  lopger ,  under  tli|^r8e  of„  u^^r  .^ 
A^anity,"  who  4fe  ''  destroyed  hody^auA  soul  in  hell  "•'P 'ho 
longer  under  "darkness,"  to  whom  is  reserved 'Hhe mist  of 
darkness  "  and  the  "  blackness  of  darkness  forever  "  ? 

Or  is  "  the  dky  of  wrath  and  revelation  of  the  righteous 
judgment  of  God "  therday  in  which  the  lighter  judgment^ 
of  personal  offences  shall  replace  the  far  heamer  one  which ' 
comes  upon  us  through  the  offence  of  another  ?     . 

To  find,  however,  the  root  of  Mr.  Birks'  vi^v  we  must  turn 
to  his  chapter  on  Atonement  hi  the  same  bo^k,  where  he  is 
answering  the  question,  "  what,  apart  from  the  atonement,  is 
the  statft  of  mankmd  befpre  God  V    What  is  their  legal 


Rtandin<r,  and  the  nature  of  the  curse  and  sentence  under 


^  -v 


n-*^. 


3C1( 


1- 


^m' 


■S'^ 


-^  > 
eatU 

1^1^'  he  fe«y>H,  w^*^'.!j^-<t<^^^  ' 

||:^m  the  iodyl  fll^alm  there 

^>  ;jind  whpt.wiU  ig^  Thee  thanks 

tlp^s  not'  show  tfeaf^ath  is  ascribod 

it  shows  that  ther^  8uch.a  thinir 

^iitp^l^v  At^i&  surery  that  th(B  soul^^        Death 

iScs  a^,:0  tlie  contrary,  named ;toget^\rhere  body 

^  areliJL^i^ctlyin  vitfw,  as  we  have  seaiM  Mr.  Birks' 

, Aath4  tlmV4  is  a  physical  condiii<$n,p^         «'«? 

M^.  dm^^''^  cor^ifltlafe^,  soul  as  loeW    But,  thiris  incongrur 

..^flttBind  unju$tiiabl&J>ii^  is  the  separatio>t||f  soul  and 

.^vbod^dissoliitian,  fcej^^  departure.    The  death  s«<i<€  is 

'^^V-^tihi  itat^  K)f/seimratiQni.^e>esult   of  ^e  dying.     A  dead 

.'.  fK  Wa^  niay  b^  a^rpse  i)r  >  spirit/  But  as  de»th°  affects  the 

^  ^  i>^  %^^      organism  in  a ^a^ifr  cannot  the  spiriti,iw^  can  speak 

^H !';  ^^^^  k  ?i  .<3jBaa  l^ody  and  cahnot  ?peak  of  a  d^ad  i^p^^  Thus  Mr. 

;^  y  il^ltfeipksVrepi^esentation  of  death  is  not  only  withpjiit  Scripture, 

V  '•  VSbttt  contrary  to  it^    And  this  destroys  the '|fei^ibund^tion 

jt^"^^^^^  But  he  goes  on  :— .  , 

■    '       'TheVords  temporal  and  eternsil,  often  applied  to  de^th, 

abolition 


Ml 


fi 


\y 


ii'i  r 


tend  mth^r  to  mislead,  than*  to' explain  the  tru 
,   'contrast.  /  »The  first  death  i&  itemporal,  l&ecause  i 

|,  fe  q.  ixvefled  projgjge  ;  but  in 'its,6\^n  "nature 

i   '/edempMoii,  i^ -aW  be  everlasting.     N) 

■    the  crotifi^rc,  n^iPPf  nature  of  sin,  nor  tb 

'  ibsiiiy  limit  or  bound.     It  is  due  to  a  migh 

;    id^N  *hiit  it^is  swallowed  up*in  etewial  vi 

f^'    As  to  victory  over  death,  every  Ghristia 
Mr.  riirks.     Fbrthe  rest  he  has-  pr^luce 
Pn  the  other  hand  I  have  sought  to, show  thatthefii-st  death 
is  in  its  own  .nature  prd\isional  and  temporary.  .  In  Speaking 
of.antaihilation  Mr.  Bjrks  has  truly  and^rctbly  said;—     '■. 


m  Christ's 
'acuities  ^f 
if  God,*  assign 
of  redemption 

^agree  with 
%;ripture. 


""^he' gifts  and  culling  of  God  ar^'wit 
then  I  a  conscious  l)eing,  not  dvpondftttf 


! 


epentanCe."  "If. 
ily  organs,  and 


(!- 


^ 


1^1 


^.   !■ 


m 


ilk.   BIRKS*    VIEW. 


445 


fitted  in  ifeelf  to  endure  forever,  has  been  given,  and  sl^uld 
tiftt'rwiiijds  be  witlidrawn,  this  would  seem  to  reverse  u  gi-eat  law 
of  God's  uit)raV'U<>vernini'ut  ; "— 

And  >v«  niay  extend  this  argument  further.  For  man 
was  made-  no  mere  spirit,  but  a  living  soul,  which  implies,  as 
we  have  seen,  a  bodily  organism.  Could  the  body  finally 
and  forever  ceas^  to  be,  and  yet**  God's  gift  be  without 
repentance  ?  That  death  came  in  through  man's  sin,  while 
of  course  true,'  docis  not  more  touch  that,  than  it  does  the 
annihilation  question ;  for  it,  too,  would  have  come  in 
through  sin.  The  argument  plainly  requires  that  what  man 
is  by  creation,  he  must  continue  to  be  ever,  although  a 
temporary  disciplin^  ofdeath  would  not  be  excluded. 

•  And  with  this  siripture  perfectly  harmonizes  It  does 
so  in  the  fac  t  that  1  clea1;h  reigns  everywhere  through  one 
offence:  over  those ^l^o  l^ave  not  sinned ^fter  the  similitude 
of  Adam,  and  over  tie  youngest  babe  who  has  never  sinned 
at  all.  Did  Qpdjf^rithis  one  offence  condemn  forever  all 
Adam's  unborn  posteVity  ?  Theology  may  say  so ;  but  not 
the  word.  Could  tht  penalty  for  Adam's  sin  upon  alb  his 
descendants  be  worse \than  that  of  their  own,  as  Mr.-Birks 

puts  it?  . 

Scripture  arg\ie8;.re|^iw<sction,  not  merely  from  the  fact 
of  atoneiBjIllplj^slpJ^  of  the  person  after 

^eatlu,*'^s,as  w^lji^^  ^i^  is  the  Lord's  argument  with 
t^jiB  mddiicees,^Tid  confirmedi  }^  o«e  whq^  Isolds  j>artially 

their  views  to^da^;'  .y '',  ^.VL3'#  '^w  :■  ,.*^-  \,  ',:'.■  ^-: 
And  again,  tlie  judgment  ftyrt^e  deefls  ^ne  itf*the  body, 
waits  as  of  necessity  foi^  the  "body- to  Msfe  again.  ^  To  say 
that  the  resurrection  of  tpe  Wicked  r^lts  from  atonement, 
is  to'say  that  that  judgment  wbii^  rleqiui^s^it  is  "the ,  fr^lb- 
of  atonan^l^o ;  .and^  that/l4i|r^n«[||Jhri8j|^lfe*  ^J  «^|J*» 
God  Wo WJi^MJi^havc  judged  men  iqir  t%2'*%Hk  =>  *  ^ /t 
While  ^^P^  would  hayc  suffeB«n^  more  severely,  as^ 
well  as  indlSirtinately,  as  thft  result  of  Adam's  sin,  than 
they  now  #ill  for  tlieii-  owul- 


i^^, 


\n 


..  -'X 


il**>^ 


T 


till 

Yr. 


'!■■, 
Bifi  ■ 

I: 


}\\ 


11 


15  »•' 


446        FACTS  AND  THEOftIE$  AS  TO  AFUTURE  STATE. 

We  shall  now  be  able  to  see  without  much  argument 
the  vitiating  error  in  Mr.  Birks'  further  statement:— 

-This  death,  the  sentence  of  the  law,  extends  to  the  whole 
man.  both  soul  and  body.  To  ^ee  'its  Mature  m  respects  t/ie  soul, 
we  must  reflect  an  its  work  with  reference  to  tjie  hodif.  One  w  the 
invisible  sign  and  sacrament  of  the  other.  The  body  is  then 
parted  from  the  soul,  its  life  ;  and  being  thus  parted,  becomes 
the  prey  of  inward  corruptionr^So  also  death  is  the  separation/ 
of  the  soul  from  God,  the  true  source  of  life  ;  and  ^U  the  confy 
sion,  chaof-,  and  moral  corruption  and  dissolutionWlnch  *olloya 
that  awful  separation.  Without,  there  is  banishment  from  ^tiie 
presence  of  God,  and  from  all  the  light  of  His  favor  and  blessiijg. 
Within,  there  wiU  follow  the  unrestrained  working  of  moral /cor-  ^ 
ruption,  degrading,  perverting,  desecratiiig  all  the  faculties/ and- 
powers  of  the  immortal  spirit.  Sin  would  thus  become, jindcr 
the  name  of  deatli.  a  '  finished'  evil,  its  own  ever-growijfe  tor^ 
mcnt,  and  the  soul  sink  deeper  and  deeper  in  an  ab^  oF  hope- 
loss  misery."  /   • 

It  is  evident  at  once  that  Mr.  Birks  does  not  derive. this 
view  from  Scripture,  but  from  his  own  hypotlifesis /that  the 
effects  of  death  upon  the  body  are  typical  of  its  effects  upon 
tlie  soul.    And  in  carrying  this  .thought  out,  he  t^kes  what 
arc  separately  true  and  Biblical  ideas— and  which  we  are  ac- 
customed to  speak  of  as  death  physici*],  and  deat^h  spiritual, 
—and    joins  them    together  in  indissolublfe  uiVion.      But 
surely  Mr.  Birks  can  scarcely  have  followed  tlys  ont  to  its 
le<-itimate  result.     Can  he  mean,  for  instance,  f^At  there  is 
nonsuch  thing  as  being  "  dead  while  living  "  V  t%^  #iritual 
death  never  takes  place  before  corporeal  V  of  t^  it  does 
necessarily  when  this  does  ?    To  the  latter  qUes^n^he  may 
perhaps  easily  answer  that  the  saints  are  s^vecf  from  this 
part  of  the  penalty.     But  if  so,  why  are  thev/not  saved  from 
the  whole,  if  the  penalty  be  oile?  if  it  be^\it  one  and  the 
same  death,  how  is  it  they  die  Ate  all  ?^  j  ; 

'      If  there  are  those  now  "  dead  "  spiritually,  while  living, 
do  these  die  miain  spiritually,  when  their  bodies  die  ? 


Or  what   is  the  difference  between  these   two   spiritual 
deaths  ? 


111 


TE. 
argument 

I  tlio  wliole 
els  the  soul^ 
Oue  is  the 
ody  is  tlien 
id,  becomes 
}  separation/ 
1  the  confv 
licli  foUoya 
it  from  tiie 
ad  blessing. 
I  moral /Cor- 
culties/and  ' 
!ome,  under    »; 
[rowing  tor-,-  < 
|»p  of  hope- 

demve.this 
318 /that  tlic 
3ffect8  upon 
takes  what 
1  we  are  ac- 
h  sph'itual, 
liion.      But 
8  out  to  its 
syjt  there  Is 
ikt  §^iritual 
t&t  it  does 
t^n'lie  ttiay 
cTfroni  this 
;  saved  from 
one  and  the 

vhile  living, 

;  die  ? 

«vo   spiritual 


Mtt.  irniKs'  VUiW. 


447 


I  can  scarcely  persuade  myself,  while  I  ask  these  ques- 
tions, (imperatively  called  fpr,  as  they  seem,  by  Mr.  Birks' 
position)— that  I  am  not  doing  him  some  unconscious  in- , 
justice  in  imputing  to  him  thoughts  which  involve  consCr 
quences  so' strange,  and  which  it  would  not  be  hanl  taxarry 
a  good  deal  lurther.  I  sl^uld  be  happy  could  I  conceive 
the  possibility  of  having  mistaken  his  meanmg.  His  words  ' , 
will  at  any  rate  speal^  for  themselves.       -      , 

Mr.  Birk8  having  got  so  far  really  without  Scripture,  at 
last  makes  an. appeal  to  it  -.^^    — r--v-     •       -^^— -i      „_  .^_ 

"On  this  view  wo  may  see  the  force  of  the  coritrpsted  figure^ 
by  which,  the  first  and  second  death  are  pd|trayed. '  One  is  *  th^ 
Uiko  of  fire,'  solemn  indeed  and  most!  awful,  yet  bounded  in  its 
range,  shut  in  by  firm  land  on  everv  side.     The^  othi*  is  '  the 
ileep,'  'the  abyss,'  'the  bottomless  pit,'  evil  reigning,' ridtmg, 
growing,  deepening  without  limit  and  without  end,  in  its  fatal 
descent,  fai-tUer  and  farther  from  Uglit,  happiness,  and  heaven. 
By  the  sentence  of  the  law,  fulfiUod  without  atoncfient  or  redemp- 
tion, mankind  once  fallen  would  be  shut  out  fi-om  God's  presence, 
und'sink,  and  silik;  and  sink  forever  in  this  abyss  of  hopeless  and 
endless  ruin.     There  would  have  been,  through  ages  without-  end, 
the  awful  reaUt^  of  a  aod-dishouoring,  God-hating,  God-bT 
pheming,self-toriifenting,G?Od-abandoned  universe.    SuchdeatlH 
the  wages  of  sin,  its.duo  desdrt,  and;the  issue  to  which  it  naturally . 
tends.     It  is  the  fatal  harvest  from  the  seeds  of  moral  coiTuptton  • 
•  harbored  in  the  soid.     '  Sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth  forth 
d6ath."'  ,  .        -  u 

All  tl9^|t  of  the  solitary  \\'ord  "abyss"!   'Mr.  Birks 

■  has  too  iiji^ly  poetical  an  imagination  to  have  always  a 

sober  judgment.     He  does  not  even  give  us  data  on  which  a 

judgment  may  be  formed.     "  Abyss  "  means '^bottomless '^ : 

so  far  isibar. ,  And  it  is  a  figure,  Mr.  BirkS  /ays,  by  which 

the  first  Ifeth  is  portrayed.     Th|t*«^  not  so  clear:     When 
'  the  devils  besijech  the  lord  thrf^  |fe,wo\ild  not  command 

them  to  go  out  into  tlje  "  deep ''gihis  ||jhe  satfie  word - 

'  abyss."     It  is  the  bottomless  1>1||||  ^jf^^^ill^^^^*'  ' 


IvDlic  locusts  ^omc,  and  thei 
lyon, "  the€Rt»yer."     It  is 


the  inys- ' 


■*;v 


i^W- 


!  t  ft!'' 


M  ^^^ 


,5T 


•^ 


»P 


^%. 


'^ 


.l.r 


44I     %A^'aS0  TUKOUIKS  ASm.A  FUTUUK  BTATli. 

U<>'^l>caHt"  ascends;  anSln^riy  tlval  iif^hicti  Satan  is  shut 

/or  the  millenrjiurn.     Thtfv'e  are  all  llio  occurrences  in' 

Jipture  save  one,  in  whicli  the  apostU^asks,  "  \Vho  shall 

(Scend   into  the  dcep^ihat  is,  to  bring  up  C|ri8t  again 

'^n  tht^lead."*  "  f  J    ^. 

NowHt'  seems  as  if  it  must, be  from  the  last  passage  that 

Mr.  Birks  has  derived  his  idea ;  and  yet  it  is  one  mpst  inap- 

propri^  for  his  purpose.     Whatever  else  it  were,  certainly ^ 

^^tho  abates  could  not  be  to  ^le  Mord  y,'hiit  he  has  pictuifcd. 

fit  ;t  could  not  be  in  that  sense,  a*  '^  al)y8S."  JEherekhc 

finds  ijt  nicture  the  death  state  of  th<5  lost  it  is  liafd  to^iiK- 

jSi^a<'ine.  %ii?-dcvils  have  no  death  state.     Satan' is  not  shut 

^  up  a*thoui?nd  years  in  death.     The  "loourit^"  are  not  a 

symbol  of, the  dl^d;  ijor  Apollyon  the  king  of  the  dead. 

The  beast,  it  is  Wu|^^%iid  to  co^ne  up  out  of  th#  abyss, 

and  before  that,V  "  wis,  ftnd  is%t''— so  that  here  the 

'     death  8tateij|fht«i|fc-figuri|l ;  bilt  ft  could  scarcely  furnish 

forth  Mr.  Biffs'  picture.     And  here  is  the  whole  array  of 

Soripture'f      ^^^         .        *    •  j^ 

Jt  can  scar^«^eed  to  foj^w  o"ut  length  a  mere  poetic 
fancy,  for  SHph  it  is.;  t  shall  J^^i»ut  two  tlpHigh^  :  h  that 
in  this  way  the  senteMe  d^P^Rey^Iaw  (as  he  j^nceives  it) 
would  involve  a'"  G>i^Mfi(gorw}f  and  God-sibandoned  uni- 
v^se  "— Godv  i^;ould  We  4en  tied  bjc  it  to  His  own  dis- 
hohor  !  the  Governor  ^tho  Universe  bound  not  to  interfere 
with  the  development  of  evil  under  -His  own  eyes ! 
'    2.;^  would  again  refer  to  the  Lord's  parable  of  the  rich 

♦Luke  vii.  31  i;ii^-7briTij7 1  iT^^ -^v'-  ^ '  ''''*  ^'  '^ '  l^""""  ''■^' 

+  He  does  in  point  i.f  fact  make  tl»e  L()r(l  endure  there,  rather  than 
'^on  the  tree."^he '•  extrmue  of  so.iKirati»n  from  His  heavenly  Father." 
TMs  is  thoroughly  unscriptilral.  I^  displaces  the  cross,  it  evacuates 
the  Lord's  crv.  "  It  is  fin i shed," » and  nincis  tl\e  threefol.L  witness  of  the 

Erit  the  water,  and  the  hlood.     It  is  a  view  which  1ms  aV)solntely,n.. 
.poi-t,  save  in  a  Jivnciful   inKM-pro^rftion  of  such  passa-os  iu»   Psa. 
Ixxxviii.  4-7  ;  Ixix.lo;  xviii.  5-15;  i^id  .is  a-ainst  ti.p.  j.lain  sense  ot 

ibo'^  a('»iiin'>  <'<ri(;acy  t<^  the  blood  of  the  ci'oss 


% 


every  passage  which  ascribes  .r  ^^    „,     .. 

Rorn..v.O,  vi.6;  T.al.  iil.  18  ;  Eph.  i.  7 ;  i^,  13-16  ;  Col.  1.  ?1,  22 ;  n. 

14;  1  Pet.  ii.  24,  etc. 


.4 


i 


0- 


^» 


AT  13.  » 

atan  is  shut 

urrcnces  in' 

VVho  shall 

Itirist  again 

massage  tliat 
3  most  inaj)- 
rc,  «crtainly^ 
as  picturfed' 
-jThfirekhc 
iiam  to^inv- 
is  not  shut 
"  are  not  a 
of  the  dead, 
r  t*h#  abyss, 
nat  here  the 
rcely  furnish 
olc  array  of 

mere  poetic 
rhft :  v.  that 
ajriKJeives  it) 
andoncd  uni- 
[lis  own  dis- 
t  to  interfere 
>res ! 
e  of  the  rich 

1,  'A\  Horn.  X.7. 
ere,  rather  than 
avenly  Father." 
ss,  it  evacuates 
L  witness  of  tlie 
,s  al)solutely  no 
issasos  iis  Psft. 
■,  j>lain  snijs'e  of 
otl  of  the  ci'oss  ; 


» 


ol.  f.  21,  22 ;  ii. 


\ 


mi.  iJiUKa':VYidBW. 


440 


man  in  hades.  licro,  if  anywhbJjie,;  wo  should  have  the  awful 
abysH  of  Mr.  Birks'  imaginatioA^.  Instoad  of  which  we  fin<l 
a  soul  ill  God^s  hand,  enduring  Hi»  wrath  ;  but  certainly  not 
the  "reigning,  rioting,  gi^jwving,  <leepening  evil,"  which,  we 
are  told,  is  the  character  W  the  first  death. 

The  whole  view  is  (I  am  compelled  to  say)  incongruoua  i 
and  nnscriptural,  reversing   the  proportions  of  death  and 
judgment,  of  the  result  of  another's  sin  and  of  men's  own.  I 
It  is  lacking  iii  moral  harmony  as  in  Scriptural  cohesion.      '4- 

There  are  two  more  ai'guments  we  iuust  brietly  loolt  a^t^ 
Mr.  Birics'  fifth  proposition  is,  that  at^— ^'"^  ,t ''"^         Jf"-.. 

^tho  lt»ve  of  Chri.st  has  a  length  and  breadth  and  depth  and 
ght,  that  passeth  knowledge,"  its  hiWnilti  iteplh  must  be  :dtani- 

tefiwed Jprever  in  the  guilty  and  coridt  nmed,  towards  Avhom  it  may 
be  sl^Bj^  in  the  perpetuiU  yearnings  of  a  dee2>  "nd  true  lilfompas- 
sion.   Vii8-,%  thinkH,  "  may  pi(?rce  through  their  conscleiyce,  and 

enrade  their  whole  being,  even  amid  their  still  abi^imig  con-  / 
iousnefw  of  deepest  loss  and  eternal  shame.  .  .  The  truth  of./' 
God  seil'ms  to  give  a  most  solemn  assurance  that  the^enal  ^eii- 
tence  shall  never  be  reversed.  The  depth  of  a  love  f^^oasseth 
knowledge  gives  an  equal  assurance  that  lli^ii  ilirtrtuMpH  not 
be,  however  terrible  and  mournful,  one  of  unmiti^llPrinisery, 
hut  such  that  even  hero  the  glory  of  the  divine  goodness,' and 
thosQ  liMider  mercies  of  God  \vhich  are  over  all  His  works,  shall 
be  revested  for  evermore." 

This,  ne  beKeves  too,  accords  with  God's  title  as  Saviour 
ot  all  men ;  and  though  unbeliever.s  are  not  saved  from  judg- 
ment, the  second  death,  and  the  fire  that  is  not  quenched, 
they  will  be  saved  from  temporal  death  and  corriqition, 
Irom  the  curse  of  hopeless  vanity,  from  the  ''  abyss" — ■"  will 
they  not  be  saved  from  that  utter,  unmingled,  hopeless  mis- 
ery, in  which  no  ray  of  comfort  or  relief  of  any  kind  breaks 
in  upon  a  dreary  solitude  of  everlasting  despair  ?  Will  they 
not  be  saved,  in  some  strange  and  mysterious  but  real  sensed 
when  their  irremovable  sorrow  finds  beneath  it  a  still 
lower  depth^f  divine  compassion,  and  the  sinful  creature 
in  its  most  forlorn  ei^ate,  and  in  its  utter  shame,  encounters 


/: 


9 


460        PAC'lb  AKD  THEOIUES  A8  TO  A  PUTURK  blATK. 

the    amazing  vislou  of  *tcu(ler,  condescending  and,  infinite 

love"?  ^  •  ^ 

.  Of  this  Mr.  Birka'  last  argument  seems  httle  more  than 
a  repetition.  It  i«  that  ajl  men  stand  in  relationship  to  God 
under  three  distinct  characters  as  Creator,  Moral  Governor 
of  the  world,  and  Uedeemer. 

*'Thi5  coutrust  botwccu  ,thi!  obedient  in ul   disobedient,   thu 

::  fuithful  and  unbelieving,  vi  their  volution  to  God  us  tlu- righteousi 
Judge;  cuuuot  set  aside  their  common  relation  to  Him  as  the. 
bountiful  Creator  of  all  men,  and  the  God  of  grace  towards  all 
who  are  sunk  }fi  guilt  or  misery..  .  .'  Siiiners,  to  whom  the  Sou 

'  of  God  was  given,  for  whom  He  bore  the  cross,  and  died  ufcursed/ 
over  whom  He  wept  tears  of  pity,  and  towards  whom  there  have 
been  patient  yearnings  of  God's  iniinite  compassiou,  and  of  His 

"  diviue  loug-sufferiug,  not  williaig  that  any  should  perish^  bUt 
that  tdl  should  come  to  repeutiince,  can  surely  never  cease,  eveu 
under  the  strokes  of  judgment,  and  in  their  depth  of  utter  shame, 
to  be  encircled  evermore  by  the  infinite  compassions  of  that  holy 
and  perfect  Being,  whose  Very  name  and  nature  is  Love." 

To  such  arguments  the  answer  has  already  been  given, 
inasmuch  as  they  are  based  upon  the  vie Wr  previously  ad- 
vanced, that  the  strokes  of  judgment  will  not  only  effec- 
tively piit  an  end  to  active  opposition,  but  remove  the 
enmity  of  the  heart  itself,  and ./u/ce— to  use  an  expression 
which  sufficiently  refutes  the  view  that  it  expresses,— a  will- 
ing subjection  to  God.  Grant  once  the  heart  so  changed, 
who  couia  refuse  the  thought  of  the  infinite  pity  and  love 
of  God  coming  in  with  abundant  and  ready  help  J  The 
difficulty  in  this  case  would  not  be  to  go  as  far  as  Mr.  Birks 
-in  this,  but  how  not  to  go  much  father.  Just  as  all  that 
have  known  God's  grace  have  experienced   in  their  c^wn 

■    case,  whatever  the  natural  impotence  for  good,  it  CQwld  hot 

"  be  an  insurmountable  obstacle  to  recovery  were  the  will 
once  with  that  divine  will  which  has  all  competence  in 
itHplf.  But  if  of  "some  on  earth  it  could  W  said,  as  having 
in  the  face  of  light  ^  Unowjledge  rtyected  Christ,  that  it 
was  '' lmp<>s><ihf>'  toMwi^w  tifem  again  unto   repentance," 

^  *  how  much  more  must  that  be  said  ot  those  whom  even  th^ 


T^ll^i^  •'•*■■' 


■E. 

id,  infinite 

nore  than 
i|>  to  God 
Governor 

dient,  thy 
I'  riglitc'ousi 
£im  ua  Ihe  . 
owiirda  uU 
m  tho  Sou 
1  uf  cursed, 
there  have 
Liud  of  His 
)erish^  Uut 
ieiwe,  "oveu 
Ijter  shtime, 
i  that  holy 
/e." 

een  given, 
iously  ad- 
jnly  eifec- 
move   the 
expression 
i8j— a  will- 
5  changed, 
r  and  love 
elpJ    The 
]Vj[r.  Birks 
as  all  that 
their  o,wn 
CQjald  not 
e  the  will 
petcnce   in 
,  as  having 
rist,  that  it 
jvontanoe," 
n  ON  on  th<^ 


THE  EtUICAL  QUESTION. 


451 


infinite  gooihiesH  of  God  has  to  give  up  to  "eternai  judg- 
ment"!    It  iH  not,  God  lorbid,  that  Ilis  compassions  fad' 
They  are  necessarily  hehl  back  l)y  the  obduracy  of  the  evil. 
That  "amajr-ing  vision  of  ti'ii.Ivr,  condescending,  and  infinite 
love"  of  which  Mr.  liirks  speaks,  e„uld  not  be  beheld  by~ 
those  for  whom  nothing  less  thanthtr  ever-enduring  strokes 
of  judgment  will  suffice.      We  dissent  from   his  yicAv,  not 
.^jecauso  we  think  less  of  the  mercy  of  tht'  RodeemeT,*  but 
betaiise  we  are  assured  that  if  it  could  at  any  time" through- 
out the  ages  of  eternity  win  the  heart  to  God,  Tu)  arbitrary 
limit  of  probaUon'passed  could  avail  to  shut  out  from  it  a 
mercy  more  effective   than  he  pleads  for.     i^l  because 
we  are  assured  that  what'  is  impossible,  for  mercy  to  effect 
is  not  more  possible  to  be  the  work  of  judgra^iit. 
We  are  now  to  look  at  the  ethical  question.'^'  , 


*■-.: 


CHAPTER  JtLII. 


C'AL   QUESTION. 


It  is  the  judgment  of'tTiany  that  the  ethical  question 
should  precede  the  exegetical,  which  seems  as  much  as  to 
say,  that  wo  mhst  first  decide  what  Scripture  omjht  to  say,' 
before  we  attempt  to  ascertain,  w^hat  it  doex.  We  should 
certainly  treat  no  other  writings 'after  such  afa.shion;  and 
the  claim  of  these  to  bd  divine  does  not  aftOct  their  claim  to 
be  intelligible  also.  If  God' has  sjioUen;  He  is  as  well  abl^ 
to  make  nim.<ielf  understood  as  another,  and  is  as  ready  too 
to  assume  the  responsibility  of  His  utterances.  If  it  be 
God,  We  nerd  not  fear  lest  His  word  shcjidd  be  immoral,  or 
that  it  will  not  approve  itself  to  the  consciences  of  men,  His 
creatures,  ,Tudg.>  Jlim  too  they  will,  no  doubt  •  but  He 
will  be  justified  in  His  sayings,  and  clear  when  He  is  judged. 


/ 


'.        *r  I  .  ■       ■  ;      .  ,     ■ 

45^    ^tACTS  ANDTUEOiHESAStOAFUTURESTATfi  ,  , 

Theri  «  little  doubt  that  tbe  attempt  to  decide  on  moral 
grounds  what'Seripturo  >/*M«f  bave  Hai«l  upon  the  ^lyect 
before  us)  has  destroyed  with  many  all  eertaiuty  ot  ^vbAt  it 
does^Hay.  Almost  everywhere  anion-  umvs-'rsalitt  writers 
'  of  every  grade  tbe  doubtiulness  of  its  testimony  is  a  thing 
cionsidered  beyond  dispute  by  reasonable  men.  AVe  may  . 
' affirm  positively  what  conscience  or  the '' moral  reason  "  says. 

We  may  not  affirnl^  positively  what  God's  word-  has  said. 
Stran«ely  enough  it  is  thought  preSttmption  to  pronounce  as 
'  .  to  the  latter,  none  in  the  former  case.     Yetlt  i«'l>«jf /'^^^^ 
supposed  God  could  not  make  Himself  intelligibir  if  He 
pleased  ;  and  none  can  deny  He  has  spoken  «n  the  Subject,  it^ 
Scripture  be  His  .word.  Is  it  to  be  sup^osed^He  meant  to  give 
no  definite  statement?     But  why  should  He  have  kept: b^cK  , 
.what  the  "moral  reason''  by  itself  can  prortounce  upon  . 
■Perchance  because  He  would  not  interfere  witli  the  province 
\of  reason  in  a  matter  aa  to  which  it  is  so  abundantly  com- 
petent to  decide !     I8.it ttifen  so  competent?    Whythenare 
ie  all  in  sucji  a  fog  to-day,  except,  indeed,' Scripture,  itself 
Uresponsible  for  the  fog,  and  have  thrown  thc^^moral  sense 
intb  confusion.     And  this  is  a  conclusion  some  weuld  seem 
to  have  arrivetf  at.  •  '.     .  » 

i'But  even  so,  it  can  scarcely  be  aperfoetly  safe  and  rc^lia- 
ble  .mide,if  liable  to  this  4)erturbati6n ;  especially  as  we 
cannot  logically  assume  that  Scripture  is-  the  onj^  possible 
'perturbing-  cause.     Conresse.lly  for  centuries  the  moral  sense 
has  %epted  the  truth  of  eternal  punishmeht  for  many,  and 
witMlie  addition  (Canon   Farrar's  mo^l  ,  sen^e  says,  the 
.  ^e>.;«i/  addition)   of  ajmrgatory  tor  n|a«k^^all.^  In.the 
majority  of  oases  within  the  limits  of  au-I§|^#m,  it  lias  , 
not  yet  been  able  to  f\-ec  itself  froni  wt^fite  |)oen  fi^^  at 
least   as  a  yoke    which  many,  wouhj  fi||Wve  shaken  .off. 
;  Nay,  having  shak<en  it  ol^W  memorably  ^<^  French  r^- 
lution,  it  has  bowed  its  neck  again  and  ISfcqiJMJ  'sub^tjt 
Outside  of  Christendom  iirtSppg  the  millions  of  Jslam^ it  bafil 
Accepted  a  creed  wherein  Grocl  is  blasphejnously  rfcpresented 
as  assigning  men  their  place  in  heaven  or  hell  with  titter 

"■■.■  ^  ■■'■■.     '     ■  ■■  •    ^  -  •■     '  '   ■•  ■■■'•;^.■-■;■■ 


w 


<s 


■  4    ■'   ;-. 


./ft 


v..-:-- 


1      '•    :.■ 


■   .■     ■    t     • 


# 


THE    KTUICAL  QITESTIOIT. 


463 


& 


and  equal  mdifforence.*     Ainon<^  Brahmans  ani,^  Buddhisms 
alike  it  accepts  the  loss  of  personal  identity ^^^the  ahu^orption 
into  Brahma,  or  the  attainmoiit. of  Nirvana,  as  the  goal  aBd 
highest  aim  of  man.     While  in  Mr.  ^Frederic  Harrison  and  ^^ 
.'the  Positivists  it  has  come  nearly  i-omid  to  this  again,  man's  * 
only  worthy  future  being  maintained  to  bo  a  future  of  *^  pos-  " 
thumous  activity":!  a  possibly  eternaUinfluence. upon  ifldefi-  c 
nite  generatioiis.  of  ephemera,  or  at  least  until  the  gradual 
cooling  of  the  sun  lirings  them  to  the  end  so  very  generally 
contemplated. 

The  moral  sqiise  can  hanlly  then  be  considered  a  satisfaef' 
tory  guide.  Nor  indee<l  do  those  who  follow  its  guidance 
dare  to  speak  of  tlie  attainment  of  any  certainty  thereby. 
Thus  Principal  Tulioch  commenting  on  Canon  Farrar's 
volumejj  while  admitting  that  men  </o  'fdraVe.to  penetrate 
'trehind  the  veil,'  and  to  lay  hold  on  something'definite  on 
whiph  to  rest  theit  hopc|  or  fears,"  asserts  that  at  the  same  ' 
time^  'all'sober  minds' will  feel  how  really  impenetrable  the 
veil  IS,  and  that  no  light  of  real  Biowlec^e  can  be  carried  be- 
yond that  sphere  of.  time  and  space  which  now  conditions 
all  ou^/i)owers  of  knowing."  "  Probability  is  all  that  we 
can^tain  to,"  add»  P,rof  Jellett,  another  critic  on  ^le'same 

♦  side.  While  Mr.  "V\^/ll.  Greg  propounds  it  as  On6  of  his 
<'  EuJgmas  of  Life,''  that  while  all  the  good,  which  he  owns 
may  be  in  a  man's  religion,  lies  in  the  certainty  it  co^nmuni^ 

f^  ^ajtes,  a  G|^tainty  that*alone  "sends  him  to  the  battle-field, 
€?j  sustains  him  at  the-  stake,  or   enables  him   to  bear  up 

•       *  Mr,"Palgrave  gives  us  as  characteristic  of  Mohammedanism,  a  tra-  : 
aitioTi,  "  a  repetition  of  whicli,"  he 'says,  "  I  have  endured  times  out  of 'f 
.     niimber  from  admiring  and  a[)i)roving  Wahhabe*s  i;i  i^ejed/i-that  whSi    ' 
God  '•  resolved  to  create  the  human  race,  he  took  into  hiS  hand  a  mass  '' 
earth,  the  same  whence,  all  mankind  were  to  be  fornj^d,  and  jn  which 
f  -  IJiejB  after  a  manner;  pre-existed  ;  and  hgiying  then  divided  the  clod  into 
'-    two  equal  portions,  he  threw  thi'  one  ha|f  into  hell,  saying, '  These  to    ^ 
"   eternal  fire,  and  I  care  not ':    and  projected  the  other  half  into  heaven, 
^,  adding, ';<flnd  these  lo  Paradise,  and  I  care  not'"  (A  "fear's  Journey 
through  Central  and  Eastern  Arabia). 
.  "f  Sec  "  A  Modern"^yni[tosiHm  "  in  tlu*  "Ninteenth  Century." 


w 


1. 


\ 


'11 


.J«l 


:v 


.fif' 


i' 


I. 


ff      - 


1.464        FACTfi  A^D  THEORIES  AS  TO  AFUTITRB  STATE. 

through  the  Unii,'  and  weary  martynlom  of  life,"— yet  "it  is 
'pVQciHely  tills  certainty  (to  which  all  religions  pretend,  and 
.which  is  essential  to  the  inHuenee  of  theui  all)  which  never- 
theless fJioui/Zifffil^aAid  sincere  minds  kmny  to  be  the  one 
element  of  Jil'sehood,  the  one  untf-ue   dogma  common  to 

them  all"*  .     -  '  '^  -:\  , 

Tims  tho  moral  reason  is  not  constructive,  but  destructive 
only-  and  destructive  of  (alas)  the  very  power  which  ^ould 
^sustaiji  a  man   through   life,  or   at   tite:' stake   if  need  ^be. 
Strangely  enough,  the  thoughtful  and  sincere  aJ-e  they  who 
must  pay  ^^^c  penalty  of  renouncing  what  Mr.  Greg,  c^lls 
"this  strengthening  and  ennobling  grace."     That  is  one  of 
4lie  "  Enigmas  of  Litb,"  as  be  understands  life  :  an  enigma 
ono  niin-ht  have  thought  essentially  atheistic,  but   which  is 
on|r-  "Agnostic,"    appertaining,  that    is,   to    a   phllosophv 
which  .without^Iiinturing  to  say,  There  is  no  God,  simply 
affirms  tliatf^ctmnot  make  Ilimself  known  lo  IIis  crea- 
tures^t— tha^they  know  enough  about  Ilim  to  know  that  t 
The  certainty  of  vmcertainty  as  to  nil  it  most  imports  to   . 
-^kbaw  is  wliat  the  pamftil  toil  of  centuries  of  i^searchi^iis^ 
.'  at  last  achieved.  '        l  J§ 

God  is  the  "  Unknowable."     But  if  He  is,  how  then  cai#P. 
we  k-now  that?   .Does-  not  .that  imply  some  knowledge  ai-' 
lea^tV     Can  reason  reU  assured  that  that   is  an  ultimate 
fact'?     Is  it  impossible  lie  could  communicate  some  know-' 
ledo-e  of  Hin\s€lf  y  some  certainty  as  to  a  future  lU'e  ^^ven  > 
lial  science  decreed  that  IliB  Bliall  be  dumb,  or  helpless,  or 
indliferent,  or  what?     Is  the  science  perchance  not  too  dear, 
that  makes  all  science  valueless  V,  Jt  would  seem  as  if  men^ 
must  think  so;  as  if  these  scientific  altitudes  .yould ' be ,too 
cold  and  barren  for  human  dwelli\ig-places.   ^Certainly  if 
reason  m;i  be  satisfied  with  that  which  takes  all  meaning 
*   .^  -  -#.. --- -  -  \-MiL-\-    '  -  "         ^r'. 

*"Eni?mnsofLife,"i).21-J.  ,    /     ;v  ^**1s»  ., 

"  -  t  "And  flnallv,  we  philosophers;  awrt  mei\  of"  science  know,  with  a 

conviclionat  least  as  positive  as  X\x4  ot  any  of.t'hese  believers   ihal 

thev  are  all  wrong-,  t'hal-  no  such  Jliota  have  ever  been  deliverejl   ai,<l 

'       that  nosiiQh    knowledge  about  the  Uiiknowable  can  ever  be  reached 


■  ■:<- 


•■'  :t  ■    ^'  >■ 


=-^ 


?% 


E.         / 

yet  "  it  is 
tend,  and 
ich  never- 
I  the  one 
mmon  to 

estructivG 
ich  \Vould 

noed  l>c. 
they  who 
h-eg~  calls 
i  is  one  of 
in  enigma 
:  wliich  is 
philosophy 
od,  sijnply 

His  crca- 
cnow  ihatt 
imports  to 
iseanih 


w.  then  cai^. 
>wledge  at"  ' 
m  nlthnate 
ionic  knou-' 
!  ly'e  even':* 
helpless,  or 
ot  too  dear, 
n  as  if  men,* 
:)ukVbe.too 
Certainly  if 
ill  meaning  • 

know,  Willi  a 
believers,  lliat 
(lelivpiPil,  aiid 
r  Itp  readied  " 


'  .7 


.  THJi   ETUICAL  QUESTIQX.  46l> 

out  of  humaiji  life  and  histoi^ ;  if  the  moral  sense  can  satisfy 
itself  AVith  what  levels  a  man  witU  the  boasts  that  perit^h; 
no  thoughtful  man  can  value  ;*eitlier's  guidance,  tio  aintera 
>    man  caii  feel  such  Itfe  as  other  than  alio.         . 

'And  what '^fthout 'shi  i  Is  there  s-uch  a  thing "?  Is  it  true 
that  "  out  of  the  heart  of  man  proceed  evil  thoughts^ 
murders,  adulteries',  fdrnications,  thefts,  false'  witness,  blas- 
phemies" V  What  says  the  moral  sense  again  :^  Are,  these  . 
things  inconvejiieiices  merely,  or  do  tjiey  ''delile  the  man"  'i 
Afe  tliQy  results  of  wrong  diet,  political  blunders,  accident, 
o^'aro  they  innrfte  in  every  child  of  man  ":'  If  tlie  latter,  and 
if  evil,  is  man  as  God  made  him,  or  is  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  the  fall  perchance  a  verity?  One  or  other  must  be. 
If  truth,  if  purity,  if;  virtue  be  any  jBore  than  a  mere  name, 
what  is  the  world,  and  what  are  we  ?  If -we' ourselves  are 
exceptions,  M?/t<ii?«i  /t<'fN^  «/•«(>/</• /if^/^/t^^/"-^  ^  If  jGrod  made 
such  a  world.  He  wer^not®od  Kitfer  therp  is  no 'God  or 
-     we  are  fallen  'creatures.  ?       ^ 

Allow  rq.e  once  there  is  such  a  thingjfe  ijp|and  the  shadow 

is'^^one  from  off  the  face  of  God.  _|fc  j:nay  .rest  on  man,  and 

on- nature,  but  faith  in  Gmlfs'pobib'Ui  Qiiice  more..    Death 

and  judgment  are  reaUtix3^^|i5it.i&t)jil  lives,  and  God  isj^ood. 

"The very  laws  9f  iiaturelStear**f|Iira  wilfcies^^as  the  exprossion 

of  a  nature  opposed  to  ^evil, '  vigitiiig  transgression   with 

penalty.     The  shadow  is4;he  fr^wn  of  God  ;  and  if  upon  " 

evil,  then  because  He  is  .opposed  to  evil.     Granted  there 

."^may  be  difficulties  and  pcr])lexities,  the  general* boarii?^  of 

•the  facts  is  evident;  and  the  huriian  laws  without  Avli|eh 

vnien  could  not  liye,  are  but  the  copy  s^d  outcome  of.  the 

nine.        „  .,     ' 

But  grant  onee  again  that  man  is  a  sinner;  gr&nt  that 

he  has  a  will  thtit  perverts  hik* judgment,  luSts  that  seduce 

Ills  intellect ;  grai^fc  ^ttiftt  ^in  iiiUulged  dulls  thi|  conscience 

.^•}ind' depraves  still  tuHher  the  heart  (and  these' are  lessons 

;,""of  every  day  experience)  ;  grant  that  an  otfendei"'  is  not  ajj 

>un- 
rational 


,  t  ■■:  '•       .  ■/        i  .'  1  o .     . —  „—  _.-^ — „.._.  ...  . — 

.j  ; -'h)^^  judge- in  his  own  cause  ;^;artd  yoii  haye  ab 

*;«''^'  darit,  over-alnindant  reason  for  idistriWtiHst  the  mere  ratio 


■^ 


■-.J' 


m 


■ 


>.« 


m 


Kki  ■ 

(* 

rr'; 

f-. 

t  ■-(■  '  ■ 

f 

I"*!, 

1'-    f ' 

'■*PJ 

}'' 

.   ♦    , 

»    'a 

r  'i\ 

r 

h  -*'. 

8  -; 

J-  V 

t^ 

II 


i^ 


456        FACTS  AND  THEORtEa  AS  TO.  A  FUTUKE  STATE. ' 

vv  eBtimate  of  man's  possible  future.  That  he  has  a  conscience 
^  capable  of  being  arouse!  by  God's  word,  and  of  responding 
to  His  appeal,  is  of  course  true,  that  God  challenges 
man's  understanding  and  his  moral  sense,  d,nd  makes  tlietii 
His  witnesses  is  also  true.  He  will  be  justified  in  His  say^ 
ihgs,  and  clear  when  He  is  judged.  But  that  those  who 
have  never  learnt  to  measure  themselves  in  His  presence 
should  arraign  His  justice  because  His  estimate  of  sin  is 
different  from' others,  is  tlae  height  of  irrationality,, as  jt. is 
of  pride.  ' 

Yet  we  are  told  that  "every  day  sees  an  increase  in  the 
number  of  those  who  will  not  cpnsent  to  receive  a  doctrine 
on  external  evidence  only,  withovit  examination  of  its  moraj. 
character.  Many  would  give  to  the  moral  faculty  the  absor 
lute  right  to  reject  as  untrue  any  doctrhm  ajjpeanuf/  to  U 
— 4mmoral,  whatever  amount  of  (apparent)  Jscripturjal  evlilence 
may  be  adduced  in  its  favor.'*  This  principle  leads  to  a 
different  issue  in  diffetent  people ;  some  giving  up  the  doc- 
trine only,  while  they  retain  the  ►Siiripture :  some  giV^mg  up 
the  Scripture  on  account  of  the  doctrine.  Thus  Dr.  JJ*llow*| 
in  behailf  of  Unitarianism  applies  the  principle;    .  % 

* '  If  we  are  to  continue  to  claim  flic  uamo  of  Christi^^ns,  we  must^ 
continue  to  believe  that  the  testimony  of  tlio  records  of  our  faith 
is  not  contradictory  of  the  cvidi^ucc  of  tbe  moral  reason.     #  ifc^, 
were  proved  such,  we  should  be  compelled  to  abandon  Cliristiau- 
ity,  so  far  as  it  claims  to  be  founded  ou  tlio^cw  Testament.     We 
believe  the  general  testimony  of  the  New  Testament  to  be  in  full 
accord  with  the  testimony  of  man's  moral  nature,  in  ^-t^ard  to\ 
the  issues  of  tm  divine  government,     /if  is  ?W  to  he  dmiett  that 
pictorial  phrases, \parables,  tmHspncidl  texts,  are  to  be  found  there," 
which,  taken  by  themselves,  seem  to  favor  not  only  the  doctrine: 
of  endless  punishment  in  the  i)di)nlar  sense,  hnti  jusf  (Hi  jdfvinly/ 
the  existence  of  a  material  hell,  and  a  personal  devil.     But  as  the 
literal  force  of  these  stjitements  obliges  ns  to  iiecept  th6  Cflincl^ 
sion  th.it  this  earth  is  the  smt  of  tfhe  final  (?)  jtidgmeiit,  and  that 
Christ  is  coming  in  person  to  judge  th<^  n«Jtt;ions,  we  must  leave  it 
to  those  who  aro  willing  to  accept  the  r(sponMil>iMty  of  maiutain- 


*,  Prof.  Jellett  upOn  ruiMii  Farrar, 


rSi- 


i 


.  ./^i'  -  .  .    'iSW-vI 


■  •is^ 


-     ■^ 


'       L     ^  TUK  EnuCAL  QUESTION^  "  4^7 

comingof  Christ  and  thp  aorfii     •    ?  ^^'^  personal 

wll.  a,1„w  ....  a-atlSetS  '  A  r^^"a' 

.,      lous  taste  will  require  tliese  latter  al<^  t„  i     m       ^       " 

-      Scripture  i»,h„»  Ipted  ,„  the ll^^vettbtX- 1 

an,l  no  one  is  offenaed.     Each  on,.  ...IT   !  '""^'¥™  n""-!. . 

■    -U  imagining  it  i.  another  ."iri^w"'"  *'?  ^'*"' 

«ua<lea  to  worship  his  ow„  image     ^l^^t^LT  ^  "If; 
as  well  as  sQinfc  ^^    11   I        .    °         ^^'■^^f^unfjulsiuners,^'\ 

evcTy  onT  ap"o  "s  fi  '  "•^'^IP'r---  aeeommodated,  ^i 
' '-       i  ^"'^  W^Qves  of  a  divmo  government  ^»^,^i,?^        t 

K.L,iipLuic,  as  ao  the  ad  /ocatos  nf  "  «^.^«,t*-       i  • 

betrav  Tir-r^  ti  •  conditional  immortality » 

g  uiu|Hoot.+    -It  IS  thus  he  argues :— 

wMeh  hult'M    1  r.?    ^"'^'^^^^"^  I--«-     To  thi.  world/ 

'  love.  So  it  i.  ::  •  ,'  1  ^''"^"^!;^^1^-^.  ^*;  *-  --  i^s  faith  apd 
»>oliev(.rw:.utkinJof  r  ivi'  V-'  f  .  '«»««^0"ai^  tells  the  un- 
i<>  oo..vert  ^:^.^:'^t:;^  the"Ch..stian  is.  in  order 

answer  of  the  henlkVii'  f  o  !  ^  ^''"'^  ""^  '^^^^^^'  "^^t't^io    ' 

---— -4i!iil^_^"  t.^i-  im-ss^^es  should  be,'Wepannot 


\ 


\- 


f- 


o 


y- 


ih 


nn 


|J»1    ! 

1 


458!       l^ACTS  AXD  TUEOUIES  AS  TO  A  FUTtrilE  STATE. 

analwill  not,  btliJvo  in  a  God  of  whoia  you  affirm  stioll  out- 
r:igti|)ns  \vronfr.'  ....  ^Vo  usk  tlu!  hilwiiiu  hourfc  foF  its  verdict. 
Wo  Hiiy  that  jinl^'i'd  by  luiinan  jiidpfiueiit,  ajid  that  the  judgmoiit 
of  Ixiliovt'iH  and  uubolievors  alik.',  the  iMiui.slnn(B>t|t}i  wLi(jh  tlit)  tlir- 
cry  of  Angustiuo  supposes  that  Ciod  will  iufU'ct'ls  infuite/i/ iofy 
gtoab,  aud  wo  are  thereforo.to  reject  it  as  untrue,  iWcimst  wholly 
Uiiworthy/not  merely  of  a  ;^tL'rciful  Father,  .but  a' just  <^p.'' 

°  X^vv  \V(i  arc  goinuf  to  look  at/-thc  doctrine,  not  cf  Augus- 
tmo  iut  of  Scrii)turo,  and  to  see  liow  la r  |tKipj> roves  itself 
to  the  conscience  of  men.  That  it  does  bid  nullt,  irhrre  th< 
emi^vifjiictj  i-i  ollm\  is  true,  as  I  have  already  said.  The  ex- 
tracts that  follow  in  Mr.  Constable's  book  I  ain  nu  way  con- 
ceded to  justify  ;  yet  even  they  tell  in  myotars  a  very 
jilifterent  story  to  what  they  p^em  to  dd  in  his;  They  tell 
mo  J)ow  little  this  vaunto'd  moral  sense— how  little  this  poor 
heart  of  man  has  really  to  say  in  the  matter.  From  the 
lioma^ists   whp  accept  an<l  approve  the  liormrsiu^' l^ina- 


'■H 


mt 


"* 


m 


■Tmonti  lor  Father  iF'urniss.  to   the   Protestant    hearei-s   of 

J^nathait  EdwardJ^  or  of    Mr.  Spurgeon,  haw  many  con- 

demned  a.s  incredible  the  tbings  portrayed  to  them?     You 

would  expect' Jrom  the  statejnents  of  tliose  wlio  laud  the 

moral  sdnse  so  highly,  that  their  auditors  wouhl  have  risen 

up  with  on '  over- powering  outlmrst  of  indignation  and  have 

driven  tliein  from  the  pulpit,  instead  of  saying  Amew  and 

4;lrctdating  their  boQ'ksP^y  hundreds  dr  by  thousands.     Pos- 

'ssibJv  the  "intelligent  an# educated  Hindoo  merchants  ami 

magistrates  "  of  whop  •"D'r.  Leask  has  told  us.*  hTid  the  ad- 

"     valitage  )n  t'bei'se  r-espects  oC  their  Ghristiau  bretlirei:.     But 

if  it  requires  iiitelllgence  and  eaucation  of  a  certain  order  to 

;     deteij^t  these  errors,  jjerhaps  aftef  all  the  virtue  is  in  the 

/    mildness  of  the  BrahlTiamsm  under  wliich  they  had  grown 

'  up  rather  ,]tlviri  the  nijpral  sense  which  eonld^give  in  the  que 

?;  case  a^leci^ioii  so  jiisf fin  the  other  «o  unliapi>y.  1      y 

^  ;  ;  We«hajJl*^«to  know,  'hbw(jv:er^  that  where  the  gospel  hias?r 

^ ' ■  :mad<»^«ii(:K  1^  permamSst  conqticst^  tteyaoe-  ^ 

,.  trmS  of  eferahlr^uni^^^^  iVas  l)#ein  heM  j^ul  jrat  fortli^  • 

-■"■•'■  „  '■»  ",i''       -■   ■  r.--™»- o  „  -     ■>••      "  •  -, ,;  ■■",     *'■■.'■  .  j*  ■   „       ■/■  ■'...- 

.    ■"  ■■„  "  *.'■  ■':■.,■ (.■.■„ -l 


iV>, 


I 


V  THE  ETHICAL  QUESTION.  459 

Nay  in  Christendom  itself  it  must,  according  to  Mr.  Con- 
stable,  have  conquered  the  wh^le  ground,  and  that  in  the 
teeth  of  the  moral  sense,  where  this  had  certainly  no  self 
interest  to  seduce  it  from  th«»  so  much  milder  truth  which 
had  first  possession  of  the  field.  IIow  strange  a  rcfl^otioit 
that  what  the  heathen  have  moral  sense  to  reject,  Christen- 
dom should  have  almost  universally  accepte<l  I  iJut  the  gos- 
pel can  scarcely  be  shown  to  have  ^von  its  way  by  the 
aid  of  annihilation  doctrine,  or  its  history  will  have  to  be 
rewritten.  , 

^If  Soript,rre  be  the  word  of  aod,_if  ovon  the  consciences 
of  men  not  the  worst  in  life  have  given"  a  true  verdict - 
manisafillen  being;  and'his  estimates  of  sin  and  its  de- 
sert are  alike  farilty.     Viewed  in  this  way  by  the  lic^ht  of 
reason  only,  we  might  well  predict  that  the  divine  estimate 
of  either  would  far  transcend  our  own.     Cottsequcmlythat 
that  judgment  of  it  which  <i;yl  transcend  our  own,  and  was 
opposed  therefore  (in  the  way  Mr.   Constable  and  others- 
speak)  to  the  moral  sense,  woM  he.prchlsehj  the  juchjnmit 
most  rational  to  receive  as  GocTs.     Herd  reaW  and  sense 
are  in  apparent  opposition,  an  ©ppositioij  whicl  the  word  of 
God  accounts  for,  if  it  does  notiremovje.     How  false  then 
must  be  the  assertion  that  the  gospel  [has.  wonVs  way  by 
winning   men's  admiration   of  God   inl  the  c^^ar^er  of  a 
Judge  !     Do  the  judgments  which  nov\  come  on  the  world   ^ 
from  the  Governor  of  it  always,  approvL  themselve^  to  men 
similarly  as  free  from  undue  severity?     No,  the  gospel  has 
won  Its  own  way  by  heinrj  gospel:  by  exhibiting  God  as  a 
Saviour,  not  a  Judge  ;  by  proffering  a  Uy  of  escape,  not  a 
mild  sentence;  and  by  the  ransom  g  ven  proclaiming  the 
value  put  upon  men's  souls  by  Him  vho  made  them,  and 
which  grve^  real  satisfaction  to  the  awkkened  conscience  by    ' 
putting  the  righteousness"  of  God,  in  tie  matter  of  salvation  .^.1 
upon  tl)e  samft  *ide  with  ?Iis  It^ve.      f  *''    ' 

'Bm   tbat   ransom   proclaim^  no :iL  in  its  transcendant    ' 
greatness  the  divine  Estimate  of  »in  a^s  Equally  beyond  our 
-own,  „  .>\  cv  ,.H  ,t  the  e.stimaU"  ol^aiV  ericmy,  or  of  one  indiffer. 


-^^ 


:.()■ 


I 


ill 

•i 

lllil 


:i 


I 


Kf 


'M 


460         FACTS  AND  THEaUlES  AS  TO  A  FUTlf  RE  STATE. 

ent,  but  of  Him  who  at  His  own  cost  has  provided  the  pro- 
pitiation. Who  that  believes -on  the  one  (!aa  refuse  liis 
credence  to  the  other  also,  when  all  that  he  1ms  to  object  is 
but  the  testimony  of  a  conscience  dulle«l  ^nd  enfeebled  by 
the  very  sin  which  it  is  called  to  jtidge,  .1  heart  "  deceitful 
above  all  things  "  as  well  as  "  desperately  wicked  "?" 

"We  do  not  believe  then  that  God  appoa  s  to  man's  heart, 
in  th6  way  Mr.  Constable  avers,  to  dec  de  whether  His 
judgment  be  such  as  he  can  accept.  Ho  appeals  to  it  by  a 
love  which  would  save  him  from  it  v altogether,  and  presents 
His  word,  attested  in  every  possible  way  a.^  His,  to  enlighten 
and  purify  his  conscience,  not  be  judged  by  it. 

Not  one  of  those  who  lay  this  stress  upbn  the  jthlgment 
of  the  moral  sense  believe  in  any  practical  way  in  the  lall,or 
in  sin  as  defiling  the  conscience  and  enfeebling  the  intellect. 
One  can  hardly  imagine  that  they  receive  \|^hat  is  the  truth 
nevertheless,  that  the  Light  of  the  world,  when  come  into  it, 
shone  upon  a  dafkness  which  "  comprehended  it  not,"  and 
that  the  cross  was  man's  verdict  as  to  IChrist  Himself. 
And  yet  here  was  not  even  judgment  at  .'ill,  but  "  God  in 
Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto  Himself,  not  imputing 
their  trespasses  unto  them '■*  In  this  form,lindco(l  (to  use 
Mr.  Constable's  language),  "  God's  char.icter  and  conduct 
were  placed  before  it,  t<>  vjjji  its  faith  and  love."  The  suc- 
cess was  not  what  he  would  apparently  imagine.  "The 
carnal  mind  *'  was  ^'  enmity  to  God."  .  And  still  it  is  so. 
By  no  mere  moral  appeal  coftld  that  enmity  %o  ch.inged  to 
love.  Man  mufit  he  born  nrfain.  I  do  not  s^v  Mr.  Consta- 
ble does  not  believe  this,  but  then  it  vitiates  his  entire 
argument.  » 

God  has  taken  ca^,. therefofi?,  to  make  His  tippeal  toman 
in  another  way  than  Mr.  Constable  suggests.;  Instead  of 
putting  before  him  as  a  philosopher  a  picture*,  of  rectitude 
with  which  ht  would  be  charmed,  or  expecting  |a  criminal  to-' 
fall  in  love  with  his  sentence,  He  has  treated  him  as  a  sinful 
but  a  miserable  being,  a  creature  fallen  and  lost.     He  puts 


*  2  Cor.  V.  19. 


4- 


M.. 


TE. 

jcl  the  pro- 
refuse   Ilia 

0  ol)ject  is 
eebled  by 
"  deceitful 

1  "?' 

in's  heart, 
other  His 
to  it  by  a 
<1  prescntR 
^enlipflilen 

jthlgment 
the  tall,  or 
e  intellect. 
;  the  truth 
me  into  it, 

not,"  and 
b  nimself. 
t"God  in 

imputhig 
ed  (to  use 
id  conduct 

The  8UC- 
le.  "  The 
11  it  is  so. 
hanged  to 
Ir.  Consta- 
his  entire 

)eal  toman 
Instead  of 
f  rectitude 
oriminal  to-^ 
as  a  sinful 
He  puts 


THE   ETUICAJr.  QUESTION. 


401 


before  this  prodigal  in  a  far-ofT  country  the  bread  in  His 
father's  house— He  appeals  to  the  self-love  xjf  an  essentially 
selfish  being.  Ho  calls  to  Himself  the  thirsty,  the  weary 
the  heavy-laden,  the  lost ;  and  the  disinterestedness  of  a  love 
which  has  come  so  far  to  seek,  and  gives  so  freely,  without 
any  gain  but  what  Jove  alone  could  count  such,  is  all  needed 
evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  message  to  the  soul  that  thus 
finds  itself  searched  out  and  besought.*  •      / 

,  Beside  this  God's  word  has  its  abundant  witnet^,  so  much 
the  more  evident  because  by  no  means  of  a  mere  fhoral  kind. 
Thus  prophecy  invokes  the  facts  of  history,  a^d  even  the 
current  fevents  before  one's  eyes;  while  in  t'he/present  day 
the^tonesof  %yptand  the  bricks  of  Assyria  are  cry  in  rr  out 
n  e^rs  however  unwilling.  Thus  not  only  conscien'ce  is 
::ppealed  to;  and  where  it  is,  it  is  ^ot  put' into  the  critic's 
chair,  but  into  the  felon's  dock  ;-nAo  judge,  but  to  hear 
judgment.  If  man  be  a.  fallen,  dep^llfed  creature,  it  must 
needs  be  so.  If  he  be  n^t,  his  exis^nce,  his  condition,  and 
his  end,  are  alike  an  insoluble,  inipenetfablo  mystery. 

Yet  it  is  quite  true  that  to.a  conscience  quickened  and 

^nlightened  by  the   word,  God's.w^s  approve  themselves. 

Vhe  light  brought  in  manifests  itself  as  suoli  by  revealing  to 

the  opened  eye  the  beauty  and  the  (iJeformily  of  things  liot 

before  apparent.     It  is  conscious  knowlecjge:  "one  thing 

j.ve  know  ;   whereas  we  were  blind,  no^^we  see."     Still  the 

horizon  is  limited,  and  if  the  ti(ie  lighffi?,.^  shines,  the  dark-  " 

ness  is  yet  passimj  only;  and  not  passed.t     lie  that  "sees 

farthest  sees  most  the  limit.     He  that  judges  himself  most 

truly  will  own  most   iully  God's  judgments  to  be  a"  great 

<leep.     It  is  not  creduhty  to  do|jU||ft  the  most  clear-sighted 

wisdom.     Reason  and  faith  ar^KiU  war.     The  app'arent 

discords  are.1)iU,  the  evolution  <7i||fe'e  perfect  harmony.- 

In  this  spirit  then  we  shrill  seeif'to^imine  the  objections 

t  >  the  Scripture  <locti^ine.  «#f  futiHe  * 

now  on  every  sidcbeing  ui|ged.     The" 

■pComp.  John  vii,  37-41. 

t  So  should  W  road  X  John  iij  8  :  ;/  6Horla  TCaffaj^srqa. 


ment,  objections 
;h  of  the  doctrine 


I; 


h^ll 


# 


n^ 


_Wj_^ 


.*/ 


'f 

Da. 

if 


yr>J 


^  u 


[ 


462 


FACTS  ANl)  111I.OUIL6  X»  TO  A  Jf'UllL'ttjB  STATE. 


remains,  established  from  Scnptiiro  itself,  apart  from  all 
question  of  our  skill  in  meeting  the  objoolions.  ^ 
'   (1.)  And  first,  briefly  as  to  one  point,  which,  though  it  be 
not  a  primary  one  perhaps,  or  actually  a  part  pf  the  doctrine 
of  eternal  punishment  itself,  is  still  naturally  enough  connect- 
ed with  it  in  men's  minds,  and  ten<l8  to  give  it  additional 
harshni^ss,— I  mean  the  coiiiparalj\e  fp^ncsk  of  the  saved. 
The  Lords  words  affirih,  as  to   His  i)eoplc',  that  they  are 
comparatively   a  "little  flock,'   although,    when   gathered 
finally  together,  they  may  be  also  "a  midtitiide  which  no 
man  can  P"«ib^2    The  gate  is  strait,  and  the  way  narrow 
that  ^^^^l^\m^m^y  an^l   ^•'•^v  there  be  that  find  it.     Here 
^^**°   ^^    ^SnjK^K^^'^    therelbre   u>    have    triumplied,   and 
Christ^  wd^^Wiave  failed :    as  Dr.   Littledalc  puts  it,* 
citing  the  arguiKt  of  Messrs.  Jukes  anrl   White;— "  if  the 
•popular  theology  be  true,  then  Christ  lias  been  completely 
defeated  by  Satan  in  the  contest  for  the  souls  of  men,  since 
incomparably  the  larger  spoils  of  battle  rest  with  the  latter ; 
and  the  incarnation  has  not  affected  the  ultimate  nature  and 
destinies  of  uiankind  in  general." 

But  this  last  is  an  uncomfo||able*  argument  in  the  hands 
of  any  save  an  out  and  out  Universalist,  such  as,  Dr;  L.  hardly 
claims  to  be.     For  it.  is  awkward  to  have  to  tjfink  it  satis- 
factory for  God  only  not  to  be    defeated.  ///  fso  )nany  cascsy 
and  tha6)  Hie  would  be  content  to  share!  with  Satan,  supposing 
on]y//«  got '-the  larger  spoils"!     Dr.  L.  blames  Ca^on 
Fa'rrar  for  having  only  "  distantly  glanced  at  [these]  two 
cogent  pleas"  ;  but  in  truth  he  cannot  Ihim.self  have  looked 
at  them  very  closely,  or  else  the  defect  is  in  his  own  percep- 
tion.    If  Satan  "  triumphs  "  when  a  soul  is  lost,  how  futile  , 
to  contend  as  to  whether  he  triumphs  somewhat  less  or 
more !    In  either  cas|  God  is  not  God.     Dr.  Littledalc  docs 
not  believe  with  tha  wise  man  of  old,  that  *•  if  thou  scorncsl, 
thou  alone  (shall  bear  it.t*'     He  -will  make  God  also  'bear 
it,Mor^hejfehame  of"  eternal  judgment "  would  be  His  ! 

*  In  his  Ciitique  upon  Canon  Farrar  in  'the  Contempomn/  licoiew,     > 
t  Prov.  ixl  12.  ,  » 


from  all 

jgh  it  be 
doctrine 
conncct- 
dditional 
ic  saved, 
tliey  are 
gathered 
kviiich  no 
'  narrow 
t.  Here 
led,  and 
puts  it,* 
-"if  the 
mpletely 
en,  since 
o  latter  ; 
ture  and 

ic  hands 
J.  hardly 
it  satis- 
fy cascSf 
pposing 
Ca^on 
se]  two 
!  looked 
pcrcep- 
V  futile 
less  or 
lie  docs 
eorncst, 
3  'bear 
lis!" 

:oieio,     < 


TUE  ETniC'Af 


;'^^- 


463 


it  militates 

juent  poHHi- 

Ih  this 

f  man's,  would 


.Yet  he  rightly  objects  to  ITni 
a^ainHt  the  existence  of  free-will, 
hility  of  a  volition  of  evil  throtf 
volition  of  evil  thou  God's  shame  or^nl! 
it  in  ten  million  men  be  any  more  His  shame  or  Ills  defeat 
than  even  in  one  V  Does  Hcripture  represent  men  perishing 
through  Satan's  power  or  orafl,  apart  from  this  "volition  "? 
If  not,  how  is  it  Satans  triumph  V^  And  as  far  as  he  has  any 
part  in  man's  ruin,  will  Jie  not  have  catise  to  own  that  ap- 
parent victory  has  been  <lefe£vt ':'  his  sm;cess,  according  to 
the  sufeand  immutal)le  law  of  divine  government,  his  degra- 
dation :—"  dust  the  seii,ent'smeat"?  Is  it  not  always  so 
that  Bucc<«ss  in  evil  is  the  dej^radation  of  the  evil-doer?  If 
Dr.  Littledale  \\^J1  think  upon  it,  he  may  yet  discover  in 
this  the  secret  of  that  ajiparenL  changt;  in  the  rich  man  in 
hades,  which  Mr.  Cox  and  Canon  Farrar -would  take  as 
moral  bettering  Imm  purgatorial  llame.  He  who  in  life 
would  have  been^e  temj)ter  of  his  five  brethren,  in  death 
would  have  them  warned  so  asAiot  to  come  into  that  placp 
of  torment.        .  • 

Man's  damnation  is  from  himself  "  Ye  would  not,"  is 
the  comi)lai^t  in  son-ow  of  tlio  One  who  came  to  save. 
Will  Dr.  Littledale  taunt  llim  with  defeat'?  The  legion 
did  not  cast  Ilim  out  of  Gadara,  but  the  men  for  whom  He 
had  broken  Satan's  poAver  ret use<l  deliverance;  Did  Satan 
defeat  Him  there  V  If  it  be- man's  eonir^ry^  will  Sj^af  is  his 
ruin,  what  purpose  of  God  dm-s  that  deieat  ?  ■  Dia  He  pur- 
pose tQ.save  all,  ^>//6vj/' man's  Will?  That  Hb  would  have 
all  men  to  be  saved  w  the  vindication  of  His  heart ;  there  Is 
no  declamtion  of  a  purpose  to  save  all  j>e/;/brcf^,  no  deieat 
of  His  purpose  if  it  is  not  done.  "^ 

.  But—    -       ,.   ,'  .  ■  /j;.-;;  '.         ''•-■ 

(2.)  It  is  objected  to  us  the  shortness  of  probation  if 
limited  to  the  present  life,  and  that  manj  have  in  fact  none 
at  all.  Canon  Farrar  has  many  a  vivid  illustration  of  the 
injustice,  as  ho  consirlrMN  it,  of  this;  but  I  prefer  to  quote 
the  calmer  statements  of  others,  not  less  forcible  :— 


■M, 
■i 


k.. 


■I 


':  ,.'^    ■.■••■.■.-■'■■.•-■.;,■■-.     '■^:-.  ;■..,..•  .-..;:  ■■  .-v.: ,  .,  .^jj      ^■^  ;.y -■:■■■■■■■. /rV  ■-.•■■:■•  ^v. -.:-<-! 

■■  .  .•.'••      ■■■.■■.         -    ■  •       .-  ■  V  "     '  ■  ■  ■.  ■   ■    :      ■■        ■  ■  -J.  _A         '    '■  ■'    '■■   .      '  ■  ■•  ■■  '-'wm-  ■    •    "  '  ■•       ;■'" 


13 


AsMolatlen  for  Information  and  lma«o  Mana«omont 

^    1  too  Wayne  Avenu6.  Suite  noo 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  209tO 

301/587-8202 


>, 


.1 

I 


Centimeter 

1.        2*345         67        8         9        10       11       12       13       14       15   mm 


i..||j.m|M|i|..|.lu|.|t^|.ljl|.|.l|.|ilm^^^ 


Inches 


2  3  4 

12.5 


I.I 


1.0    [!:■-  * 

H^  Himm     1 2.2 


1.8 


L25   111.41   lllllt.6 


I 


Ti 


r.. 


v: 


<p 


/: 


yiS"  /I 


*  •  rf^^^V 


.V 


MflNUFPCTURED  TO  RUM  STRNDflRDS 
BY  RPPLIED  IMRG^.    INC. 


^'^ 


.^ 


¥    • 


464        FACTS  AND  TUKOttlKS  AS  TO  A  FUTUIIK  STATK.  - 

"Ah  yet  I  am  compelloil  to  bcliovo,"  sivys  Cumm  Plumpti-o,* 
"tliiit  wlioro  thero  Iuih  boon  ^no  iulcqimto  pr^liiition,  or  imiio  id 
jiU,  tluTo  must  b(!  SOUK!  oxtousiou  of  tlu;  i)os.sibility  of  «lt'"t'l<2i>- 
mout  or  clmngo  boyoigil-  tlio  liuiits  of  tliiH  prf.scnt  life.  TiiKo  tlu' 
ci»e  of  unbiiptizud  cUiidn-u.t  SlmU  wv.  t-loso  tlu'  giitos  of  Punulisf 
iigaiu.st  them,  apd  satisfy  ourselves  with  the  tHrixsimti  tinmnatiti, 
whieh  gained  U}V.  Augustine  the  repute  of  tht)  (liinis  jtdtfr  infitii- 
tuni  ?  And  iKwe  are  forced  in  such  a  case  to  admit  the  law  of 
progress,  is  it  not  legitimate  to  infer  that  it  extends  beyond 
them  to  those  whose  state  Is  more  or  leas  analogous  ?  "  Ho  adds 
further  on,  "  The  theory  I  am  now  defending  givt>b  a  significanoe 
to  the  final  judgment  of  which  the  popular  belief,  in  gri'at  menj«- 
ure,  ^prives  it.  Prdtestants  and  Catholics  alik(>,  for  the  most 
'  part,  think  of  that  judgment  as  passed,  irrevocably  jmssed,  at  tlu^ 
moment  of  death.  The  soul  knows  fts  et<.'rnal  doom  then,  i)ass(>s 
to  heaven  or  hell  or  ptirgatory,  has  no  real  scrutiny  to  expect 
wherf  the  Judge  shall  sit  upon  the  throne  ;  while,  on  this  view, 
the  righteous  award  will  then  be  bestowed  on  each  according  to 
the  tenor  of  his  life  during  the  whul'tt  period  of  his  existence,  and 
not  only  during  tke  short  years  or  mouths  or  days  of  his  earthly 
being.  This  gives,  I  venture  to  think,  not  a  less,  but  a  more, 
worthy  conception  of  that  to  ^hich  we  look  forward  as  the  great 
completion  of  God's  dealings  with  our  race." 

Dr.  Bellows,  on  behalf  of  Unitarianism,  goes  yet  further ;  J 
he  says:- 

"  What  we  have  hitherto  objected  to  in  theTireed  of  orthodoxy, 
on  the  subject  of  eternal  punishment,  was  the  alleged  finality  of 
human  fate,  as  determined  by  the  state  of  the  soul  at  the 
moment  of  death.  ♦.  .  This  life  has  been  considered  to  be  mainly 
a  state  of  probation,  and  the  only  state.  Unitarians  reject  both 
ideas.  With  them  life  is  not,  here  or  anywhere,  mainly  a  state 
of  probation,  but  a  state  of  educatipn  and  discipline  ;  and  still 
more,  a  state  of  heAngfor  its  own  sake.  /-We  can  conceive  no  state 
of  human  existence,  that  is,  of  finiti^spiritual  existence,  which 
shall  b^  diflferent  in  these  respects  from  the  present.  .  .  ^e  can- 
not, with  our  reverence  for  the  freedom  of  the  will  and  the  free 

*  Cantemporary  Mevicic.  f 

f  It  should  in  fairness  be  stated  that  Dr.  P.  is  arguing  with  a  Roman 

Catholic. 

.    \  N.  Amcr.  Review.  . 


■# 


.'.■„■  'flJi:    KTHlCAh  (illKHTlOK.  .405 

piny  .)f  .s|urihMl  laws,  bo  iiiin.nfr  ii.o.^,  wh„\hiuk  moml  ovil,  with 
Its  MU.T,  nn-s  aiKl  its  lUMmltirs,  will  1m,  fon-ihly  torminatod  by  a 
Imt  of  divMH.  b..,.:'vr.!, :...,,  ut  :y.y  fntniv  iluf...     Wo  objoct  t..  tho 
oM  ortho.l..x  vi.  XV  of  tho  finality  of  hunmu  probation  at  death,  as 
.  Liekmg  i,r..i>Julity,  as  .lisro{ranliupf  our  prosout  oxperienco  of 
Ooa  sprov.-.nnont  un«l  lli(.  «-oustitution  of  man'sspirit.    Moreover 
whiloit  soonis  awfully  threatoning  to  those  who  are  inclined  to 
oviI  and  uro  lil  Ay  to  bo  lost,  it  sc^oms  relaxing  of  moral'  and 
spiritual  obligations  toward  tlioso  who  expect  to  bo  saved.     It  is 
.   tt  dootrino  too  eruol  for  tho  w.,rst,  too  flattering  for  the  best." 
With  ^Yhicl^Dr.  LittlcHlalo  fully  agrees.     He  objects*  to 
the  popular  view  <.f  "this  life  being  a  state  of  probation, 
a  solitary   chance,    failure    in  which    involves   destruction, 
just  as  with  us  gun-burrel!*  which  cannot  pass  the  test  in 
the  proof-house  arc  invariably  condemned,  broken  up,  and 
cast  into  the  fire,— but  only  to  be  forged  anew." 

"Thoro  is  no  warrant  in  Soripturo  (ho  sjiys)  for  this  current 
opiniop.  which  in  tnith  nbcossitatos  a  d*.'nial  of  God's  foreknow- 
ledg.  .,.  not  boing  ablo  to  trust  His  own  work,  nor  to  predict  how 
It  wiU  turn  out  till  Ho  has  t<  stod  it.     Ho  does  indeed  try  and 
prove,  but  It  IS  in  tho  way  of  .v/«cr//i^^  and  purgation,  not  of 
inquiry.     '  Whon  Ho  hath  (rin/  moj|^iiall,  coihc. forth  as  gold  ' 
(Job  xxiii.  10).     ♦  Behold,  I  will  mm  them  and  tr^  them' (Jer 
IX. -7).     Onoo  grasp  tho  notion  tlyit  we  have  only  one  Ufa  given 
us  to  bvo,  and  that  dtmth  isun  more  episode  in  it,  so  that  this 
world  IS  but  a  lower  class  in  God's  school,  and  another  stage  of 
education  an  our  uubrokon  personality  and  life  beyond  the  grave 
awaits  us  in  the  intormodiato  state,  whethor'tlmt  stage  be  down- 
ward or  upwards,  according  as  we  have  used  our  opportunities 
hero,  and  tho  whole  schomo  of  redemption  shows  clearer." 

4.nd  even  President  Porter  suggestst  that— 
••Then,  when  the  future  life  begins,  every  man  will  see  Christ 
as  He  IS,  and  tho  sight  of  Him  may  of  itself  bring  ajinalitj/  to  his 
character  and  destiny,  as  it  discovers  each  man  fully  to  liimself. 
They  thAt  pierced  Hini  shall  mourn,  but  not  if  when  thef  see 
Him,  they  mourn  that  they  piirced  Him.  The  next  life  may 
be  another  probation,  in  that,  by  it«  first  revelations,  it  shaU 
ni^cverything_cloar  which  w;is  darjc,  and  bring  out  in  vivid 
*  In  the,  (hnteinp.  Her.  ^f  Igihe  K  Amer.  liev. 


)■ 


t 


■/•■\ 


M 


,  ti 


«■  f 


M 

i^! 

'i 

■ 

m 

SttU'i 

460         FACTS  ASU  'rniiOUlES  AS  TJ  A  FUTURE  8TATR. 

"  Uneltlmt  moral  and  npiritual  tniib  which  the  soul  shaU  accept 
with  synamthiziug  joy.  or  vejoct  with  Hiuful  V^'^^'^'^'^\l^'^ 
asitaLptsor  r.-j-vts,  nh^dl  ku.m  itBpwa  character  and  ite  just 
award.  .  .  .  The  opeiiing  Hceut.s  o(  th^slicxt  Ufe  m..y  be  at  once 
the  soul's  w^cmid  prol^ation,  and  its  liual  ^dgment." 

All  this  is  anti-scriptural  merely,  and  If  unsound,  then  of 
necessity  dan-erous  to  the  last  degree.     To  teach  men  that 
they  may  put  otT  into  the  future  that  xvhich  Wist  be  decide<l 
here  and  now  is  nothing  less,  than   enticin<,\them  lo  sell- 
destruetion.     I  have  no  desire  to  retain  the  uWl '' prolja- 
tion  '•  •  but  tliat  Scripture  insists  upon  it  that  salVation  is  a 
possibility'otily  for  those   who  find  it  in  this  life,\ehave 
already  seen.     The  denial  of  it  is  reckless  ignpranca^^r  un- 
belief    It  destrojrs  the  whole  meaning  off  death  as  de^th, 
the  solemnity  of  the  appeal  to  man  founded  upon  the  brevit 
of  his  life  here;  that  the  Son  of  Man  hath  power  on  cart/, 
"~   Id  forgive  sins,  and  that  nbw  is  JJ^cccpted  time,  and  now 
*   the  day  of  salvation ;  ^that  "  h/^vjWovcth  his  life  shall  lose 
it,  and  he  that  hateth  his  lif^e /M^MvcoW^?  shall  keep  It  unto 

life  eternal."*  It  denies  th(J^fact  that  already  m  shades  is 
there  a  ''  great  gult  fixed,"  dividing  the  evil  and  the  good, 
and  thai  it  is  when  Mnjuil  (or  die)  they  ak)  received  into 
.y.r/«srmr/ habitations.t  It .  is  contradicted  b\the  affirma- 
tion—the  very,  opposite  of  Canon  Plumptre's  idcX— that  tlie 
sentence  in  the  day  of  judgment  will  be  for  deeds  done  "  in 
tWfe  body,"  and  not  at  all- for  conduct  in  the  intermediate 
state  :  Finally,  that  the  spirits  of  the  unsaved  departed  are 
.  «'  spirits  in  prison,^'  and  with  whom  (if  His  dealings  be  the 
\  same  with  all,  and  we  may  argue  from  the  case  of  those 
before  the  flood)  God's  Spirit  will  no  more  strive.^  ^^ 

With  regard  to  Canon  Plumptre's  *'unbaptized  inlants, 
I  suppqse  as  far  as  inadequate  probatioi*  or  want  of  develop- 
ment is  concerned,  they  are  scarcely  worse   off  than  those 
baptized.    And  while  with  all  such  the  taint  of  a  vitiated 
nature  needs  to  be  removed,  those  who  know  how  absolutely 

.       ♦  Matt.  ix.  6  ;\cor.  vi.  2 ;  John  xii.  25.  '       ^         .  ^ 

t  Luke  xvi.  0.      \t  2  Cor.  v.  10.        (^  1  Pet.  iii,  19  ;  Gen.  vi.  3. 


TUE    KTIIIUAL  (JUISTION. 


407 


any  ciiis  will 


we  are  debtors  to  IJivinc  gra«c  for  this  Janycai.  , 
have  no  d.fficlty  in  thi,  respect.    That  Gotl  oannotVo 
«how  mercy,  where  no  human  wiil  can  yot  bt  sunpoli^ 

affirm      Ti   '      ..   ,7  V"^      "'■'''''' '"""t  prove  who  would 

fr .  in  ,T  r ,     '    "  '''^"'  ''"  "'"""y  ''"■•>"''S«'1  l-or  deed, 

■     he!  V .        •';;'■;  ""'  ^■•"•'■■"■""'  fi"»"y  for  a  nature  which 

.'heyh.  e  w„l,„,,t  any  act  of  their  own  will.     Of  this  the 

Ijord  g,ve«„.fldl  .assurance:  "i„  heaven  their indcs  do 

And     ,t  ,s^„  ,t  the  will  of  your  Father  which  is  in  heaven 
lh.at.«nc  of  il,..„,  little  ones,«h„uId  perish  "•  °' 

prot->,io„*'r  '•''"'■■'»''■'«  o'-joctions  to  the  whole  theory  of 
probation,  I  .„pp„«.  „„  „„„,,„„,,,  J' 

xenso  he  a.»:<„„,,s,„,  if  i,,  were  Gods  proving  what  wal  a 

maucrof, ..certainty to Uintsclf .apart  frL theV^of    W^ 

t  hould  be  „,canm«tcnt  for  ^tim  to  allow  m.an  after  all  to  go 

^rough  the  ,r,.l,  because  H^Xorcees  the  issue,  is  nollt 

hetm?  ""  ^''»[<"='y '»'i«ve  in  the  Edenic  trial  for 

the  ^me  reason ;  nor  that  Moses'  account  of  the  wilderness 

can  be  ihe  true  one,  that  "  the  Lord  thy  God  led  Thee  tTel 

forty  yeWm  the  wilderness  to  humble  thee  and  to  prov^ 

thee,  Iq  hhin  w/uu  ./,«.. ,-..  ,/.!...  ........      ,  ,.      ""''O  prove 


.k.     .     A  '"  "umuic  tnec  and  to  nrr 


keen  hi,  ..A        /  •  «"'«"«'•  »o«  wou 

n!?l     ,  '•°"X"""''««'»  <"•  """t     This  he.wiirnatari« 

m  only  God  reusing  to  act,  upon  His  foreknowledge  or    " 

^In  the  rame  way  thV^law  has  been  the  probation  of  man'- 

B^tlh'^  T"T'°  P™\y-"  ««  -J^  Moses'  wo"dT; 
dven^  tK  "  "^^'^Xtl-ove'dict  has  been  longTnt: 
fhT.  I  '  'f  "■""■  "ShtWw,  no,  not  one;  there  fs  no^ 
that  doeth  good,  no,  not  onc.\  And  •■  we  kno^  ttA  T! 
th^gs^oevertb^  Uwsaith,  ^  »„  Z^Z  t'ZZ 


xvjii.  io,  n,  14. 


t  Deut,  vlii. 


Ih 


II 


1 


^Exod. 


XX.  20. 


^. 


468         rACTSANDTHKORIESASTOAFUTUilKSTATE. 

the  la^v^  that  every  mouth  rmiy  be  stoppca.  and  alUhe  wori^^ 
hpf omc  cruilty  before  God.' *  , 

dcmnation  i»  not  merely  a  IMcce  of  past  history;  it  .8  of 
^rscnt  and  universal  force  V,y  n-^s„n  of  our  .ompl.te  3sscn. 
UaUdentity:  "as  in  water  tace  answerclh  to  face  so  the 
he  r    ofVfan  to  n,an."    But  in  another  respeet  also.  .n,l 
sU     more  solemnly,  is  probation  pa.»«l,  inasmuch  as  when 
.-Jle  was  in  the  world,  and  tke  world  wa.  made  by    Im 
the  world  knew  Him  t.ot.     He  came  unto  H,s  own,  and     m 
own  received  Him  not ; "  so  that  those  who*<?  rece.vcn.n,, 
3  who  do)  a«,  manifested  by  the  very  fact  to  be  "^m 
.iTt  of  blood,  nor  of  trie  will  of  .he  flesh,  „or  oj  the  ».«  «/ 

man,  but  ofGod."t     I    _.     ,,.„  u.^e  Judgment   9f  the 

Thus  the' cross  of  Christ  was  inc  juu  nre^  v 
world  "  ;i  and  man  is  convicted,  not  only  of  having  faded 
To  Ittain  hgal  righteousness,  L'-.'^'^fJ-ing  refused  tl.  One 
who  came  to  save  him  from  the  law's  penalty  a  so.  Thi^  .8 
why  I.cannot  contend  for  the  term  "  probation,"  as  applying 
to  God's  present  dealings  with  men ;  whi  e  j-et  .t  .s  true 
that  God  will  not  finally  feat  men  as  ;n  the  lump  con- 
demned, but  each  man  for  his  own  personal  rejec  ion  oi 
Himself:  his  reprobation  of  Go.l  will  be  necessarily /.«  o.™ 

""'xhe  «me'r*v.ire4for  this.«nd  the  circumstances  I  have 
not  calculated,  noPaol  presume  to  have  wisdom  for  tK 
calculation.     If  others  have,  they  should  P-l"-;."- -««_. 
ments.    They  v^ho  believe  that  God  has  given  Hi    hon  fo. 
men  can  rest  in  the  conclusion  that  not  only  will  He  be 
"dear  when  He  is  judged,"  but  that  His  long-suffering 
mercy,  and  His  will  that  none  shonl  J  pensh  will  be  abund- 
antly revealed  in  the  fast-hastening  day  of  manifestation. 
This  they  will  not  venture  to  anticipate;  nor  can  they  be^ 
Ueve  that  the  world  would  be  one  whit  ''«"«' /"/T^^f  jf 
the  secrets  of  that  government  were  made  fully  known. 


•  Rom.iii.10,12,19.  tJ"''" '•  "^1'- 


♦  John  xii;  81. 


PACTS  AND  TtEOniES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE.        400 

Tho  existence  of  evil  is  the  one  real  and  only  aiffic.ilty ;  but 
It  exists :  and  (Jod  has  answered  the  qnostion  as  to  Himself 
/aised  hy  it,  not  by  a  logical  explanation  of- tho  difficulty, 
^  which  It  may  perhaps  be  doubted  if  we  Rhoul(\  have  ability 
to  understand,  but  by  unveiling  Himself  in  Christ.  I  sec  in 
the  cross  His  holiness,  I  see  Ills  goodness,  I  see  His  love; 
and,  if  the  darkness  be  only  passing  and  not  passe<l,  I  can 
walk  ami<l  it  withmtt  stumbling  with  a  Father's  hand  close 
clasping  mine.  The  darkness  that  remains  is  but  the  neces- 
sary school  for  faith ;  but  a  iaith  which  has  the  surest  grotmd 
under  its  feet.  «  We  kno>y  "  but  "  in  part  '• ;  still  we  himo. 
The  imperfection  wilf  pass,  but  the  truth  now  known  will 
abide  forever.  • 

(3.)  For  the  continuance  of  evil  God  cannot  be  held  re- 
sponsible, save  by  an  argument  which  throws  upon   Him 
equally  tho  responsibility  of  its  present  exiiitence.     It  is  easy 
to  assume  that  God  could  aviU  it  out  of  existence  at  any 
moment  if  He  i^leased,  but  then  we  must  needs  assume  that 
lUjoilled  it  into  existence.     Mr.  Birks  has  wcirfi^own  how  • 
much  of  the  darkness  which  involves  the  rsubj^M  proceeds 
from  crude  thoughts  of  omnipotence  in  this  way.     That  He 
could  annihilate,  on  the  principle  men  are  now  zealously  ad- 
vocating, the  sinful  being  is,  of  course,  as  a  matter  of  power 
over  His  creatures,  to  be  allowed.     But  the  necessary  limit 
of  even  Almighty  power  is  determined  by  the  circle  of  the 
divine  perfections.     That  infinite  Wisdom  could  do  so  we 
may  not  assume,  except  by  assuming  our  own  to  be  infinite. 
Nay,  even  reason  may  argue  some  things  apparently  against 
it.    For  His  gifts  and  calling  w^ild  scarcely  be  without 
repentance,  did  Ho  destroy  a  being  naturally  deachless  which 
Himself  had  given  ;  dnd  such  is  at  least  man's  spirit.     Mr. 
Constable  has  abtmdant  cause  to  argue  that  the  only  true 
basis  for  annihilation  is  materialism.     But  such  a  mechan- 
ical destruction  of  evil  might  well  seem  to  be  its  triumph  in 
another  form,— a  coifession  of  his  being  defeated  by  it  in 
the  creature  thus  destroyed.     If  men  turn  round  and  ask 
why  at  least  create  the  being  that  He  knew  would  fall,  the 


'if'! 


■If. 


"iV 
■iX. 


I  m 


I 


J! 


470         FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTUIIE  STATE. 

practical  answer  is,  He  has  created.     "  Who  art  thou,  O 

•    ^  man,  who  repliest  against  God  ?  " 

This  line  of  argument  Scripture  itself  suggests  to  bo  the 

true  one.  The  conflict  with  evil  is  ever  represented  in  it  as  ,. 
a  real  thing,  and  a  necessary,  not  to  be  dispensed  with  by 
the  mere  fiat  even  of  Omnipotence :  and  that  because  Om- 
nipotence in  God  means  necessarily  Omnipotent  Wisdom,* 
as  it  does  Omnipotent  Lqvc.  TKUs  He  "  willeth  not  the 
V  */t  death  of  a  sinner,"  yet  they  die.     Who  will  sajTcilo  wills 

.  ('  their  sins  ?  and  yet  they  sin.     And  when  we  arc  told  of  some 

that  "  it  is  IMPOSSIBLE  to  renew  them  again  imto  repent- 
;  ^       ance,"t  if  we  are  to  take  such  words  in  their  full  and  appar- 

ent sense,  must  we  not  believe  that  Omnipotence  had  in  their 
case  found  its  limit?  or  can  we  say  God  would  not  still 
have  renewed  them,  if  He  could  ?  In  the  face  of  His  own 
repeated  protestations,  can  we  believe  ihat  through  His 
pleasure  sinners,  however  much  sinners,  could  not  be  re- 
newed? ^ffl^' 

If  we  touch  mysteries  on  all  sides  here  (and  so  we  do),  all 
the  more  must  we  keep  to  the  simple,  plain  assurances  which 
are  the  silver  thread  guiding  us  through  the  apparently,  and 
to  us  really,  inextricable  labyrinth.  God  is  God,  because 
God  is  good :  and  to  this  His  word  holds  us  fast. 

On  the  other  hand  it  does  not  represent  Him  as  baffled  by 
'  r  the  evil,  and  having  to  undo  His  own  handiwork,  as  if  man's 
will  were  thus  triumphant  above  His.  The  reality  of  the 
conflict  with  evil  gives  the  only  basis  for  the  reality  of  vic- 
tory over  it ;  and  that  victory  is  assured.  "The  Lord  hath 
'  made  all  things  for  Himself;  yea,  even  the  wicked  for  the 
day  of  evil ;  "J  not  their  wickedness  surely,  but  tlftmselves. 
Praise  -Him  therefore  they  shall,  as  "all  His  works "^0-. 
The  "vessels  of  wrath  "  and  "to  dishonor,"||  are  still  ''ves- 

*  It  seems  to  me  that  herein  Mr.  Birks'  argument  as  to  the  limitation 
of  Omnipotence  in  measure  fails,  that  he  does  not  insist  eriough  that  the 
limit  is  onjfy  that  imposed  by  the  Divine  Perfections. 

t  Hel>.  vi.  4-6.  :t  P^ov.  xvi.  4,  ^  Psa.  cxlv.  10. 

i  Rom.  ix.  2i  i  ;i  Tim.  ii.  20.  ;., 


« 


TUB   KTHR'AT,   QrFSTION.  471 

BcVaiHlhavo  their  use.  Who  nhall  nay  that  "to  show 
(.0,1  M  wrath,  au.l  make  His  power  known,"  is  not  nucha 
necessity  in  divine  government  us  in  any  other  '' 

The  eternity  of  sin  is  the  real  basis  oftho  eternity  of.mn- 
iBhment.     If  n.  this  life  God  ha«  with  any  spent  all  available 
resources  in  vain  for  their  deliverance,  so  that  He  should 
Himself  have  to  say  -  it  is  impossible  to  renew  them,"  what 
less  than  "eternal  fire  "  can  be  the  award  of  those  of  whom 
He  has  had  to  say,  "  he  that  is  unjust,  let  him  be  unjust  still  ■ 
and  he  that  is  filthy,  let  him-bo  filthy  still  "  ?    Mr.  Gre.r  tells- 
uh:*  -  No  subtlety  of  logics,  no  weight  of  authority,  will  in- 
duco  rightly  e-.nsntule,l  minds,  which  allow  themselves  to 
reason  at  all,  to  admit  that  the  sins  or  failings  of  time  can 
ment  the  retribution  of  eternity,-ihat  finite  natures  m;. 
by  any  gudt  of  which  they  are  capable,  draw  upon  thera- 
solves  torments  infinite  either  in  e^se^^or  duration."    But 
a  though  we  must  allow  that  that  il^fe  way  the  doctrine 
ot  eternal  punishment  has  been  often  sought  to  be  justified, 
it  IS  not  the  scriptural  ground  of  it.     Nay,  it  is  one  which 
has  obscured  the  subject  it  was  meant  to  clear  /for  it  repre- 
sents  God  in  judgment  as  merely  at  the  best  exacting  the 
lull  extent  of  penalty,  even  supposing  it  proved  that  that 
were  the  extent.  ■ 

Mr.  Constable  represents  the  view  I  am  advocating  as  one 
JpV?" '''  'i^'  f  "g««tinia„  theorists  "  are  taking  new  ground. 
Ihat  IS  of  httle  moment,  that  it  should  be  new  to  them,  if 
only  It  be  a  return  to  Scripture.  At  the  same  time  I  cannot 
accept  1  rof.  Mansel  as  the  exponent  of  it,  if  Mr.  Constable 
gives  justly  his  exposition.!  Scripture  gives  no  hint  of 
^  sins  throughout  eternity  increasing  in  number,  in  magni- 
tude, and  m  guilt  I  Condemnation  and  punishment  throuffh- 
out  eternity  gathering  force  and  falling  more  terribly  upon 

Mr  "7*^^f  «"«*--«''!  We  may  agree  perfectly  with 
Mr  C.  that  "Scripture,  from  first  to  last,  says  not  one  word 
of  the  sms  of  hell."  And  with  Mr.  Girdlestone,  as  he  quotes 
him,  that  "as_the_saved  will  be  raised  above  the  possibility 
*  Enigmas  of  Lifo,  p.  271.        f  Nat.  and  Dur.  orFxn:Vnr^T^ 


,*  't\ 


w 


I 


I 


I 


>.'• 


rt 


472         FACTS  ASI)  TIIEOUlKrt  AS  TO  A  PUTUKE  STATE. 

of  siiiiiinj,';  h<»  tlu>  loHt  will  Iw  «unk  below  it."  But  while 
sin  ill  act  will  hr  than  roHtruincMl  by  puniHhment,  Fie  that  is 
mijuHt  will  not  bo  U-hm  ut»ju«t,mt>r  lie  that  iti  filthy  less  filthy. 
Ucstruiiit  is  not  rt't'onnutloti.  Tlio  cturnal  sUte  \h  one  fixed 
absolutely  and  bounded  on  all  sidcB,  as  Mr.  Birke  BOggests 
with  prol)ablo  truth  a  "  lake  of  fire  **  may  intimate. 

Wo  do  not  accept  then  the  teaching  that  the  punishment 
of  hell  is  inrticted  for  the  sins  of  hell.  On  the  other  hand 
wo  cannot  concede  feliat  the  measure  of  eternal  judgment 
being  the  measure  of  the  sins  of  this  life,  as  it  Burely  is,  mili- 
tates in  the  least  against  the  doctrine  that  the  eternity  ot 
pmiishment  is  bajiod  upon  this  eternity  of  a  sinful  state. 
Mr.  Constable  seems  never  to  have  considered  indeed  this 
view  of  it.  IIo  must  distinguisli  between  sin  and  a  sinlul 
i^taLe.  The  everlasting  fire  is  correlative  to  the  undymg 
worm.  And  hero,  if  we  consider  a  little,  there  is  no  oppo- 
sition between  the  eternity  of  the  punishment  being  linked 
with  the  abiding  of  the  sinful  condition,  and  the  measure 
of  the  sufi'ering  being  apportioned  to  the  actually  committjd^ 


sms. 


For  the  works  and  the  words  according  to  which  men 
will  be  judged  are  of  course  the  manifestation  of  the  sinner 
himself.     And  such  is  the  actual  phrase  used  m  Scripture. 
"  We  shall  all  appear  before  the  judgment  seat  of  Christ  "* 
is  more  literally  "  we  shall  all  be  manifested:'     Our  ATorks 
will  bring  out  our  characters,— will  exhibit  us.     If  it  were 
not  so,  such  a  judgment  would  be  necessarily  partial.     Inas- 
muchnhen  as  men's  works  exhibit  their  character,  and,  tha*.  ^ 
a  character  which  abides  forever,  they  are  judged  accordin«; 
to  their  works,  and  yet  with  "  eternal  judgment." 
'  (4.)  Thus  the  punishment  is  not  indiscriminate,  becausd 
in   each  case   eternal.     "  Few  stripes,"  as  compared  with 
i'  many,"  may  have  (and  will  have)  their  counterpart  in  the 
wrath  inflicted,  and  yet  that  wrath  "abide"  on  each  who 
has  chosen   it  for  his  future   portion.     Mr.   Gregt  urges 

*  2  Cor.  V,  10.  t  K'>ia«"a»  «»f  J^'f"--  I'-  -^'*- 


\ 


while 

lat  is 
ilthy. 
axod 
;ge8t8 

kmcnt 
hand 
pnent 
,  mili- 
ity  ot 
state. 
1  thiH 
sintul 
dying 
oppo- 
finked 
easure 
nitted 


1  men 
sinner 
ipture. 
irist  "♦ 
Works 
t  wero 
Inas- 
d.  tha*."^ 
ordin«; 

ecausci 
I  with 

in  the 
h  who 

urges 


TUK    KTIIIC'AL  QUBHTlON. 


•17a 


strongly  the  ohjection  indeed  of  any  such  "  hroad,  bold  lino 
of  demarcation, "as  this  infers, 

"BoponUing,  through  nil  futuro  ngeH,  and  hy  houn.lIosH  (UHtancoH, 
th<»H«  whoso  rocoHuro  of  niu  or  virtiui  whilo  on  furth  wiw  wnircely 
diMtinguiHlmhlo  by  the  finest  and  most  drlioato  monil  clfctromett>r. 
On  one  side  is  oudloss  happin.'HM,  tUo  sight  of  Oo<l.  .  .  f„r  thoso 
wliom  one  frailty  morf,  ono  lubbnl  wcnikn.jss,  ono  hair's  broiulth 
further  transgression,  woidd  have  justly  condemned  to  dwell  for- 
ever •  with  i\w  devil  and  his  angels, '  an  outcast  from  hope,  chained 
to  his  iniquity  forever,  alono  with  the  irreparable  1    Hn  the  other 
Hide  is  helj,  the  scene  of  torture,  of  weeping  and  gnashing  of 
teeth  ;  of  the  ceasoKjss  flame  and  the  undying  worm  ;  where  •  ho 
that  is  filthy  must  bo  filthy  still  ' ;  torment,  not  for  a  period,  but 
FOREVER  :  for  Him  for  whom  ono  effort  uioro,  ono  tmnce  of  guilt 
tho  less,  might  have  turned  tho  trembling  balance,  and  opened 
the  gates  of  an  eternal  paradise  !    Human  feeling  and  human 
reason  CANNOT  believe  this,  though  they  may  admit  it  with  lip 
assent ;  and  tho  Catholic  church  accordingly,  here  as  elsewhere 
steps  in  to  I||^J*t.them  with  tho  via  vmW,  which  is  needed," 

It  is  curi'^  and  instructive  to  see  with  what  comparative 
favor  tho  infidel  lookfl  upon  Popery  as  compared  with  Protes- 
tantism.   The  two  are  united  in  this  at  any  rate,  that  they  alike 
•     set  aside  the  word  of  God.  Opposition  to  this  is  what  is  every- 
where working  in  the  nnrencwed  heart  of  man.     It  is  more 
noticeable  even,  because  purgatory  is  no  snch  via  media  as 
Mr.  Greg  believes  it.     It  decides  nothing  as  to  the  line  be- 
tween the  lost' and  saved,  to  which  alone  his  own  lnn<nia-e 
can  apply.     ItTherely  rejects  the  full  value  of  the  blood  of 
Christ  to  cleanse  from  sin,  and  the  power  of  tho  Spirit  to 
renew  and  fit  for  heaven,  apart  fro,n  purgatorial  surterinff. 
This  partial  infidelity  Mr.  Greg  naturally  accepts  as  a  step 
in  the  right  direction.     But  purgatory  settles  nothing  as  to 
eternity.  "  . 

Mr.  Greg's  o^vn  statement  does  not  by  any  means  present 
more  truly  the  Bible  doctrine.     He  would  represent  the 
-  /lay  of  judgment  as  ranging  men  in  their  gradations  of  sin 
_^  or  of  hotess,  and  then  breaking  the  line  asunder  at  a  cer- 
tain pomt,  and  sending  one  part  to  hell,  the  other  to  heaven 


■i'V 


V 


m 


:M 


-i 


I:; 


■'■>  M 


"tt>. 


471         FAtTS  .VNU  TUfc^UlIW  AS  TO  A  FUTUKE  aTATK. 

It  in  the  oU\  luathon  mythology,  often,  in«h»c<l,  attcmptc«l  to 
be  Chrii»tiaiiiy.oil,  Whereby  a  man'n  future  h>t  would  ^mj  do- 
cidcti  according  jim  hm  bad  deeds  «»r  hiH  j(ood  Hliuuld  ovor- 
balaiue  the  «»lher.  Stjripturo  dots  not  allow  thai  iji  thin 
way  a  single  dinner  oouhl  be  naved.  Instead  of  any  going 
to  heaven  in  this  way,  all  would  bo  alike  lost  and  con, 
deinned.  Tlie  law  as  tlu*  rule  of  judgment  pronounces, 
'•  there  is  none  ri;4hteous,  no,  not  one,"  whieh  Ohristianity 
doeM  not  set  u^ide,  but  natVirms.  Hill  is  the  award,  not  of 
a  certain  overplus  of  sin,  but  of  the  rejection  of  Ilim  in  whom 
alone  is  help.  Heaven  is  the  fruit,  not  of  a  little  more  than 
semi-righteousness,  but  of  Another's  atoning  work  availing 
for  the  eonlessPiliy  unrighteous.  .Mr.  (Jreg's  picturo.ia  not 
oven  the    earrcature  of  ('hristianity :  it  is  its  fundamental 

opposite.  •  .  L 

(5.)  Mi^.  Greg  again  objeots  to  a  doctrine  which  reprcRents 
the  sufferings  of  a  future  world —  \ 

•*  lut  pt'nul.^not  purKiUoriiil,- -retributive,  not  n'formatory.  It  i^ 
not  cjwy  (ho  think«)  to  eonci'ivu  any  olijfct  to  bo  tmswcred,  iiny 
part  in  the  great  plan  of  rroviib'uco  to  bo  fulfilled,  by  the  inflic- 
tion of  torm«;nt8,  whethar  temporary  or  pcriKitual,  which  uro 
neither  tostno  for  the  purifi<!»rtion  of  thostMvlio  endure  them,  nor 
needed  for  th«j  wurniug  of  thorn'  who  Iwhold  them,  siiure.  tlie  in- 
habitants of  earth  ^o  u«>t  He(5  them,  and  the  trauslutrd  denizens 
of  heaven  d(»  not  require  them.  .  TUry  are  simply  aimle8.s  and 
retrospective.  //  /«<  *rto;  that,  in  ff/f^fh/nrftfion  nf  thj'  jthiln.^npher, 
thetf  are.  iXEvrr.vHLE  ;  tlmt  future  sutTeriii}.?  is  the  natnnU  offttpring 
alftd  neces.sury  oonsecpience  of  present  siu  :  but  this  is  u<>t  the  view 
of  thb  doctrine  wo  aro  con.siJeriug,  nor  is  the  character  of  the 
sufferings  it  depicts  such  as  would  logically  flow  out  of  the  sins 
for  which  they  are  supposed  to  bo  a  chastisemi^nt. " 

Again  Mr.  Greg  praises  the  comparative  wisdom  of  the 
"  Catholic  "  invention  of  purgatory,  and  adds :— • 

••  Cut  to  believe,  as  Pr«testailt«  are  required  to  do,  that  all  those 
fiercer  torments  will  bo  inflicted  Avhiai  no  conceivable  purpose 
is  to  1m»  answered  by  their  infliction,  when  the  suffering,  so  far  as 
human  imagination  can  fathom  the  case,  is  simply  gratuitous,  is 
aSJjuretUy  a  for  harder  strain  upon  our  faith,— a  strain,  tqp,  which 


ifHk 


\ 


THE   EXniCAL  QUE8TI0W. 


476 


in  liarclo«t  on  t\tcm>  whow,  feelings  nro  the  niont  J.umun.  nnd  wh«w 
..oiio,,«  of  tl.o  |>ritjr  Hro  w.,rtl.ioHt  ;  o.i  tl.oH<..  llmt  i«,  who  havo^ 
uhmi  hilhy  imMnd  C'lirinfH  wnitttninitH  ,iml  vi.mH. "• 

Tfu^so  thou  at  IcjiMt  nro  they  v/ho«c  "  notictiH  of  the  Deity 
•re  worthiest ;  "  and  yet  it  has  often  hoeii  remarked,  and  it- 
l«  true   that  Home  of  the  most  Holemn  denunoi#«m*  of  eter- 
nal  jiid^nnept  to  he  founds  in  the  whole  IJihle  are  in  the  , 
.liHcourneH  of  our  Lord  HimRelf.     Mr.  Ore-  will    perhai»8 
hehevc.  this  incou8i«t4.noy ;    for   ho   h   himself  ineonHiHtent 
cnoujrh  to  suppose  that  the' worthiest  notions  of  the  Deity 
have  eonie  down  to  us  from  One,  who  on  his  showinir  must 
Jmve  hcen  after  all  an  in.postor.     B.ltj  beside  thisrin  the 
omiception  of  tlie  philosopher  eve„,~a  wisdon,  l>y  which  all 
(Jther  wisdom  may  j,q  fairly  judged,-future  wiflerinir  is  in- 
ov.fable  as  the  natural  offspring  and  nerx^ssary  consequence 
of  present  sin.     This  we  may  believe,  therefore,  the  action 
of  those  natural  laws  to  philosophers  so  dear.     But  natural 
aws  are  blind  ai«J  aimless  things.     We  must  not  believe  in 
there  bemg  wisdom  in  them  it  seems,  or  purpose  ;•  for  wis- 
dom implies  one  who  has  it,  an<l  purpose  a  Controller,  and 
these  thoughts  in  thi«  connection  are  foreign  to  a  true  phi- 
losophy    Laws,-self-acting  laws,~perchance  self-made  also 
-have  decreed  future  suffering  for  present  sin.     That  saves 
us  thmking  about  purpose.     T/ie  sentence  of  law  maybe 
/M  a,s   n   different  thhu,  from  the  jml^pnct  of  a  judge. 
We  can  accept  the  inevitablo,  just  as  that. 

In  point  of  fact,  however,  Mr.  Greg  tells  us,  "  it  is  not 
impd^s.ble  to  imagine  a  future  world  of  retribution  in  such 
form  and  coloring  as  shall  be  easy  and .  natural  to  realise,  as 
shall  be  not  ou\j  jmsible  to  believe,  but  impossdd,  to  disbe- 
lieve. Apd  he  represents  that  -  if  the  s^ul  be  destiired  for 
an  existence  after  death,  then  (unless  a  miracle  be  worked 
to  prevent  it)  that  existence  must  be  one  of  retribution  to 
the  smful,  and  purgatorial  suffering  to  tl^e  frail  and  feeble 
soul." 

He  believes  tWn  in  thcj)robabilitv  of  retrilnUicm  as  di^ 


*  EnigiHas  of  Life,  pp.  272,  27^. 


^if 


■•':l' 


^ 


^ 


476        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


r 


tiDct  from  purificatory  sutfering.  He  does  not  wait  to  ask 
whether  there  are  to  be  any  to  behold  it  -for  whose  warning 
it  maybe  needed.  He  does  not  inquire  whether  "  gratui- 
tous "  or  not.  lie  speaks  of  "  retribution,'  /.  t'.,"  repayment, 
rccomj)ense."'  Perhaps  ho  does  not  believe  that  "  retribu- 
tion "  coulTl  ever  be  "  gratuitous,"  so  that  he  need  not  con- 
sider it.     Perhaps  he  U  rhjld. 

But  then  that  is  also  the  Scripture  view.  The  judgment 
of  sin  is,  of  course,  recompense,  retribution.  Is  there,  or  is 
thefe  not,  implied  in  this,  righteousness  in  exercise?  If 
God  be  a  Moral  Governor  of  His  creatures,  can  He  at  His 
option  dispense  with  this  punitive  exercise  of  righteousness  ? 
Can  He  blot  out  penalties  out  of  His  statute  book,  and  yet 
leave  intact  the  laws  which  the  penalties  accompany  ?  Hot 
certainly,  if  Scripture  be  true ;  or  where  would  be  the  mean- 
ing of  its  doctrine  of  sacrifice  ?  "  As  Moses  lifted  up  the 
serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so  must  the  Son  of  Man  be 
lifted  up."  "It  became  Him  for  whom  are  all  things,  and  by 
whom  are  all  things,  in  bringing  many  sons  unto  glory,  to 
make  the  Captain  of  their  salvation  perfect  through  suftfer 
ing.''*  If  retribution  be  not  needful,  if  the  mere  benevo- 
lence of  God  could  have  dispensed  with  it,  Christ  plainly 
need  not  have  died  at  all. 

This  to  Mr.  Greg  anay  be  nothing;  yet  he  sees  and  can 
assure  us  of  tlie  necessity  of  retribution  from  the  nature  of 
things.  And  who  gave  things  their  nature  ?  Is  it  not  at 
least  evident  that  the  God  of  nature  and  of  revelation  are 
thus"  far  one  ?  ,  Apart  from  all  purpose  it  may  serve,  can  sin 
cvist-and  God  ignore  it  ?  Can  He  be  indifferent  ?  Can  He 
let  it  goon  and  not  exhibit  Himself -in  opposition  to  it? 
not  show  His  anger?     And  that  is  essentially  the  fire  of 

hell.:,-  -  ^'  ■  - .   -  ;.■  ---  ■ 

God  is  ^'willing  to  show  His  wrath^  and  make  His  power 
known."  There  is,  an<l  must  be,  therefore,  governmental 
necessity.  In  the  only  world  of  which  we  have  experience 
retribution  is  a  manifest  law  of  His  government.     On  the 

*  Jolin  iii.  If ;   Ileb.  il.  10.      ~        '~~~~~~~' 


^2*i 


THE  ETHICAL  QUESTION. 


47r 


inductive  principle  what  other  can  we  conclude  to  be  the 
universal  law  't  And  even  with  regard  to  those  who  suffer 
fron»  it,  why  should  it  not  bo,— nay,  will  it  not  be,— as  Mr. 
Birks  lias  rightly  argued  (although  he  has  gone  to  unscrip- 
tural  lengths  in  carrying  out  the  principle), ^nercy  in  meas- 
ure even  to  them,  that  judgment-»  recompensed  ? 

(6.)  Last  of  thej^bjections  I  shall  notice  that  relating  to 
the   tortures   of  Iwjifc  being    corporeal.     "Instead    of   the 
'majestic  pains'  adapted   to  man's  complete  nature,  and 
capable  of  such  impressive  delineation,  the  torments  assigned 
by  ordinary  Christianity  to  the  future  life  are  peculiarly  and 
exclusively  those  appropriate  to  this;  they  are  all  bodily; 
yet  the  body  is  laid  dowij  at  death";  and  "the  doc^e 
of  thp  resurrection  of  the  body  has  been  shown  by  Bush  in ' 
his  *  Anastasis '  to  be  neither  tenable  nor  scriptural."    So 
says  Mr.  Greg  once  more.*     But  the  {bought  of  the  bodily 
sufferings  of  the  lost  has  been  one  of  great  perplexity  to 
many  who  fully  believe  in  the  doctrine  of  resurrection ;  a 
perplexity  which  has  been  transformed  into  incredulity  by 
the  pictures  that  have  been  drawnof  them  by  vivid  and  sensa- 
tional oratory.     But,  as  Mr.  Birks  has  well  remarked  in  his 
paper  on  Canon  Farrar's  book, 

"  the  vehement  dislike  of  any  element  of  sensible  pain  in  future 
punishment,  when  the  doctrine  itself  is  received,  and  also  that  of 
the  resurrection  both  of  the  just  and  unjust,  has  no  warrant  either 
of  Seni)turo  or  reason.  To  behove  that  in  the  life  to  come  some 
^i-iU  suffer  intense  mental  acguish  and  agony,  through  former  sin, 
and  tp  they  wiU  so  suffer  in  the  body  after  they  have  been 
raise(^from  the  dead,  and  still  to  conceive  that  a.painless  and  unsuf- 
fering  body  will  be  the  clothing  or  vessel  of  a  spirit  enduring 
nitensest  anguish  and  mental  torment,  is  an  opinion  as  plainly 
uurea^nable  as  it  is  opposed  to  the  natural  meaning  of  the  sacred 
text.  .  .  With  regard  to  frightful  pictures  of  future  inisery.  Uke 
those  of  Tertullian  in  the  preface,  of  Henry  Smith,  and  Jeremy 
Taylor.  I  would  remind  the- Canon  of  his  own  picture  in  thesd 
sermons  of  the  horrors  of  delirium  tremens  to  the  unhappy. drunk-  / 
ard.     If  one  drunkard  more  can  be  reclaimed  by  such  dark  color-A 

*  Enigmas  of  Life,  pp.  268, 269^  ~~^  ^  / 


!i 


■'  if 


Jl' 


478         FACTS  AXD  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATf!. 

ing,  tltero  may  bo  a  full  warrant  for  tho  prcaclior.  But  tho 
prinoiplo  in  both  eases  is  tho  Bamo.  I  fear  that  in  botli  the  indnl- 
gonco  iu<lra\ving  i)icturo.s  of  intense  liorrur  i.s  more,  likely  to  revolt 
some  and  deiuhai  tlio  feelings  of  othei-sthan  elTectnally  to  veelaini. 
The  Scriptures  at  least  give  us  no  pattern  of  feuch  '  gliastly  '  modes 
of  impressing  their  warnings  deeper  on  the  conseit^nees  o^  men. 
Their  warnings,  those  of  Christ  Himself,  are  the  more  impressive 
because  tho  words  are  few  and  simple,  severe  in  their  calm  gran- 
deur of  eahiest'4;aution  :  outer  darkness,  weeping,  moniliing,  and 
gnashing  of  teeth."      "  . 

As  Scripture  iscvidently,  however,  what  has  furnislied  the 
basis  of  these  descriptions,  it  will  be  well  to  ask  just  what 
it  conveys.  Are  these  expressions,  '' undying  worm,"  "  un- 
quenchable fire,"  literal  or  symbolic;  and  what  proof  have 
we,  if  we  have  any,  as  to  this  ? 

In  the  first  plac6  the  apostle's  language  before  qubtcd, 
that  "now  we  see  through  a  glass  in  .an  enigma,"  seems 
clearly  to  indicate  their  symbolic  character.  The  descrip- 
tions of  heaven  which  are  given  us,  few  have  any  diftieulty 
in  admitting  to  be  symbolic.  We  have  none  that  seem  of 
any  other  kind.  And  this  argues  forcibly  that  the  same 
thing  should  hold  as  to  the  pictures  of  hell. 

Further,  if  the  valley  of  Ilmnom  be  taken  (as  must  surely 
be  done),  as  lurnishi^  the  images  Avhereby  the  Gehenna 
of  the  future  is  pictured  to  us, — "  worm"  and  "  fire,"  which 
were  literal  in  the  first,  are  manifestly  symbols  as  applied  to 
the  second,  and  scarceW  (heir  own  symbols. 

Again,  if  Satan  be  cast  into  the  lake  of  fire  to  be  tor- 
mented tliere,  it  would  seem  that  the  fire  must  be  other 
than  natural  which  sljould  torment  hhn.  And  the  same 
must  be  said  as  to  the  Hch  man  in  hades.         ' 

Finally,  taken  as  figiros,  those  expressions  have  a  signi- 
ficance and  power  whi^h  fail  altogether  when  taken  literally. 
The  undying  worm  h^s  indeeil  been  commonly  held  to  be 
the  typo  of  remorse  of  conscience,  and  this  as  bred  of  cor- 
ruption it  would  very  naturally  represent.  But  then  the 
fire  unquenchable  would  almost  of  necessity  be  figurative 
also,  and  stand  for  the  wrntli  of  llirn  who  is  a  "  consuming 


te*!^ 


-.••B5^p»5^ 


THE   EIUICAL  QUESTIOif. 


479 


fire.      With  this  would  agree  the  title  given  to  Gehenna  of 

^the  secon.    death,"  as  being  complete  spirjtudl  separation, 

tinally  by  d.vine  judgment,  from  God  the  source  of  life- 

and  th.s  again  wouM  give  full  and  terrible  typical  significance 

to  that  millennial  judgment  with  which  Isaiah  closes,  where 

the  8„iy    13  ^^..^^  ^^^^^  ^^^  g^^  ^^^  "carcases "-the  dead. 

1  his  explains  also  why  the  fire  can  torment  a  spirit,  and.whv 

,  a  corporeal  being  may  exist  in  it  unconsumed;  or  wh4  the 

<lestruction  "  brought  about  by  it  need  be  no  material  del 

struction.     Everything,  in  short,  in  this  way  is  consistent  and 

harmonious    as   much   upon   the  literal  hypothesis  seems 

difficult  and  contradictory.  / 

This  does  not  indeed  do  away  with  the  thought  of  cor- 
porea  sutfering,  but  it  leaves  the  manner  of  it  unrevealed  ^ 
aiM]  allows  room  for  the  difference  of  few  and  many  stripes' 

'';^''V     iV'V^'^''^''''^'^'^^^  which  the  conception 
of  material  fire  for  all  seems  at  least  to  obscure 

But  this  is  not  ail  the  picture  of  the  future  woe  which  the 

with  the  , gilt  oi  heaven,  is  again  clearly  a  spiritual  concep- 
tion.  Weeping  and  gnashing  ,of  teeth,"  is  a  different 
thought  from  that  of  active  and  rebellious  evil,  which  so 
many  connect  with  the  idea  of  hell.  The  anguish  of  seemg  ^ 
Abraham  andlsaac  and  Jacob,  and  all  the  prophets,  in  the 
kingdom  ot  Cxod,  wliile  being  themseli^^  thrust  out,  is  also 
spoken  of.^ 

These  are  the  descriptions  given  to  ijs  m  the  Scripture  of 

eternal  judgment     Separation  from  G(^d  and  good,  the  sense 

of  Ills  wrath  and  the  infliction  of  it,  /emorse  of  conscience, 

hopelessnpss :  these  are  the  main  elements  in  that  solemn 

hereafter      II  Mr.  Greg  will  pondeAhem,  he  will  find  the 

picture   he  ^^  drawn  anticipated  id  its  essential  features 

Nay,  there  can  be  ^ttle  doubt  but/  that  Scripture  has   in 

fact,  unconsciously  to  himself,  furnished  him,  with  what'ap- 

pears  to  him,  the  product  of  hia  natural  thoughts.     But  I 

i^edjmrsjie^is  noJV^her.^  ^^^^^^ 

'  *  Luke  xiii.  28.  ""  r~"  " 


480         FACTS  AND  THEOttlBS  AS  TO  A  FUTUttB  STATE. 

(to  use  hie  own  woi-ds)  "  everything  which  clouded  the  per- 
ceptions, which  dulled  the  vision,  which  drugged  the  con- 
science, while  on  earth,  will  be  cleared  off  like  a  mornjng 
mist.  We  shall  see  all  things  as  they  reaUy  are^ — ojur- 
selves  and  our  sins  among  the  number."  Yes,  but  too  laite, 
forever  too  late,  for  those  who  have  refused  to  face  now  ^e 
reality  of  what  we  are,  and  what  things  are,  aS  Seen  by  t^e 
light  in  mercy  now  held  out  to  us.  "  The  long-»Uff6ring  of 
the  Lord  is  salvation."  God  warns,  that  He  may  not"  strike. 
Meanwhile  man  may^arraign  His  judgments  and  refuse  His 
mercy.  They  cannot  avert  the  one.  They  cannot,  when 
once  it  is  passed,  recall  the  9ther. 


CHAPTER  XLHI. 

I^ST  WORDS  WlTg  ANNIHILATI0NIST8.      . 

The  end  of  my  examination  is  then  reached.  It  remains 
to  say  a  few  words  as  to  the  general  tendency  and  connections 
of  the  doctrines  we  have  been  reviewing.  Many,  who  by  no 
means  hold  them,  are  yet  blind  to  the  evil  they  involve. 
And  in  this  way  uiey  gain  toleration  at  the  hands  of  num- 
bers; who  learn  to  look  on  at  their  steadily  increasing  accept- 
ance with  an  indifference  which  produces  lamentable  results. 
Quietly  the  leaven  works.  And  Mr.  Blain  can  say,  with 
perfect  truth,  "a  large  number  in  the  different  churches  be- 
lieve the  doctrine,  who  say  but  little  about  it,  except  to  its 
open  advocates."  N'ordoes  the  profession  of  a  very  large 
amount  of  truth  hinder  its  reception,  as  humerous  instances 
bear  painful  witness. 

I  wish  to  point  out,  therefore,  very  briefly,  some  things 
that  are  connected  with  it,  and  some  fruits  which  grow  upon 
this  root  of  evil.  The  tree  is  known  by*  its  fruit,  and  thQ 
fruit  ip  here  abundant  m^  evident  enough. 


\ 


481 


iA8T  WORDS   With   ANNIHILATIOKISlg   ' 

ut'lr  P"'!:7'.'''"'l"«'-I  *all  confine  myself  to  the  Joo- 
th2;       "  ""■  ""'""  '""  "'"'  ^-^  "P  «ho  restomion 

In  the  first  place,  the  undermining  of  Scripture  is  very 
ey  dent  „,  many.  We  must  distinguish  somewhat,  and  g!ve 
due  credit  to  the  fact  that  a  more  respectable  class  of  wrS 
in  th,s  respect  have  come  to  the  front  of  late,  especially  in 
England      Yet  even  among  these  the  tendency  is  to  li^ 

mTIi;  n"  "■"'"*<"•  "^'"^  *•>«  tone  of  scepticism  is  „n- 
m.8takable.  We  are  told  that  no  Vindioation  of  eternal 
punishment  can  be  made.  "voraii 

w,.  "i'w 'i'  "P  "l^  P^P"""'  °P™™'  <"  disguise  and  conceal  it  as 
we  may,  ,t  must  ever  appear  to  all  nlional  creatures  the  ver^ 
e^nce  of  oily  injustice,  and  cruelty.  Can  we  beul  that  he 
dc«=t..ue  .s  taught  m  the  "  precious  Bible,  book  divine  •  9  And  i! 
t  so  ?  Must  our  sense  of  justice  and  goodness  in  Him,  in  wto^ 
hand,,  ,ve  .u-e,  float  on  a  tempestuous  and  shoreless  oceai  f^rTv^^ 
J.O    he  effort  to  lock  up  reason  and  common  sense  muchkllr 

icelmgs,  both  of  samts  and  IhoufflH/ul  sinners  must  burst  the 

bolto,  and  emerge  into  light  and  reUef."* 
If  this  were  a  solitary  statement,  or  of  one  writer,  I  should 

not  quote  ,t,  but  similar  language  is  used  by  man;.    Quito 

m  accordance  with  it,  Mr.  Hudson  gives  ns  a  volume  of  &„ 

hundred  and  sixty-eight  pages  upon  the  subject,  the  "  Serin- 

tural  Argument"  occupying  si^ty-seven.   This  single  chapter 

he  naerwards  enlarges  into  a  smaller  volumo,t  "designed  " 

he  says  "to  meet  the  convenience  of  those  who  rely  for  their 

r/cir-"""'"'""'^  '-^^-'  interpreUnlf 

Mr.  Edw.  White  is  still  more  frank  in  telling  ns  his  esti- 

ma  e  of  the  word  of  God.     In  his  "Life  in  drL "  (p  39^ 

amid  much  similar  language,  he  uses  this :_  '*^'       '' 

"I  cannot  conceal  my  conviction  that  the  path  of  dutrvandof 
wisdom  m  dealing  with  such  documents  as  the  K<^pds  dr^,^, 

thlspn^ticalconclusion^-lmeyog^rto  J^^^L^Z^ 


*  Blaiiis  Reviow  of  lieecher,  p. 


p.  33. 


[\ 


t  "  Christ  <Jur  Life.' 


■  ill 

IT 


I'M 


.— ',  ■   '.'■'■ 


482    *'tX<ytS  AND  tHEOllIES  AS  TO  A  PUtURB  StAtti. 

Christ's  doctrine,  by  excess  or  defect  conspicuq^^ly  disagreeing 
with  ihe /acts,  or  witli  the  plain  sense  of  His  teaching  as  recorded 
by  the  same  or  other  historians,  resolutely  to  re/ use  to  allow  such 
exceptional  misreports  or  omissions  to  inter/ere  with  the  truth  which 
has  been  learned  by  a  wider  survey  o/ the  evidence." 

With  many  who  are  not  as  open  as  this  the  secret  under- 
current is  yet  manifest.  Jt  suggests  to  Mr.  Blain  that  "  the 
book  of  Revelation  can  settle  no  doctrine,"  and  whether  thia 
one  text  "  looks  strong  enough  to  vanish  (?  vanquish)  the  two 
hundred  and  ten  opposing  ones."  It  suggests  to  the  authors 
of"  The  Bible  vs.  Tradition,"  that,  of  this  Bible,  such  a  passage 
"  may  have  been  amended  by  some  officious  copyist."  It 
makes  Mr.  Dobney  deride  the  seeking  to  "  the  hieroglyphs 
of  the  isle  of  Patmos."  It  reasons  in  Mr.  Constable  that  if 
tl«e  parable  of  Luke  xvi.  "  coithl  be  truly  shown  to  teach 
[non-extinction]  views,  the  only  effect  would  be  that  of  es 
tablishing  a  contradiction  between  one  part  of  Scripture  and 
another,  of  of  affording  reason  to  think  that  this  parable  of 
Lazarus,  despite  the  authoritg  of  manuscripts,  formed  no 
part  of  the  original  gospel  of  St.  Luke."  Thus  the  authority 
of  the*  word  is  undermined,— that  word  which  asserts  for 
itself  that  "  all  Scripture  is  given  by  inspiration  of  God,  and 
is  profitable  for  doctrine.''*  To  seek  to  get  the  sacred  text 
as  perfect  as  possible,  free  from  the  real  mistakes  of  copyists, 
is  another  thing ;  but  to  invent  conjectural  criticisms  of  this 
kind  is  but  the  poor,  vain  refuge  of  unbelief,  too  timid  openly 
to  avow  itself  as  such.  Mr.  Hastings'  own  words,  used  as  to 
.one  class  of  these,  the  deniers  of  the  resurrection  of  the 
wicked,  apply  but  too  well  to  very  many  mote  :  "these  pas- 
sages still  standy  after  all  the  attempts  to  evade  them,  to 
convert  them  into  mere  figures  of  speech,  or  to  retranslate 
them  in  [such]  a  mannw  that  they  shall  flatly  contradict 
their  originals !  "* 

This  last  mode  of  evacuating  Scripture  is  with  the  lowest 
class  of  annihilationists  (who  are  not  the  least  popular)  the 
one  perhaps  the  most   frequently  adopted.      "  The  Bible 

*  Relribution,  p.  74; 


LAST  WORDS  WITH  ANlfflHILATIOlf ISTS.  483 

*'!•  Tradition  "  is  crammed  with  new  translations,  specimens 
of  which  have  been  already  given.    But  at  the  other  end  of 
the  scale,  Morris'  "  What  is  Man  ?"  a  book  of  the  most  ex- 
travagant pretentiousness,  is  perhaps  as  full.   Ellis  aW  Read 
when  Greek  and  Hebrew  fail,  bring  in  Syriac  to  their  aid' 
yet  do  not  know  the  difference  between  the  singular  and 
plural  of  a  Greek  participle,  or  between  the  verb  de^ai 
(dexai)  and  the  adjective  Se^^d  (d^x^a).    Thus  the  minds  of 
the  simple  are  thrown  off  their  balance,  anS  doubts  insinu- 
ated  even  as  to  the  honesty  of  the  common  translation,  cal- 
culated to  destroy  all  faith  in  that  which  alone,  to  ordinary 
^  readers,  represents  the  authoritative  word  of  God.* 

(2.)  But  there  is  another  thing  most  evident  and  most  dis- 
astrous in  results.  Mr.  Hudson  admits  and  laments  the 
prevalence  of  materialism  among  the  upholders  of  the  views 
he^advocatesr  and  he  notices -one  consequeflce,  that  the 
difeculty  which  results  from  thus  conceiving  of  the  wicked 

exacted,  has  led  many  to  deny  that  the  'resurrection  of 
the  unjust  '  signifies  their  being  made  alive."  This  view  is 
spreading  among  them.  That,  at  the  worst,  «  feath  is  an 
eternal  sleep"  and  there  is  no  day  of  recompense  or  retri- 
bution. What  that  leads  to  is  plain  enough.  - 
Mr.  Hudson  disclaims  this  materialism.    Mr.  Constable 

wirr-KT.  "^^''ir'^"'  ^««^rt«  its  legitimate  connection 
with  amnhilation.    For  if  the  cardmal  terms  of  the  contro- 

ZsTbTf  ^^'  ^^,T''^"*^y  ^^^^••ted)  Hfe  and  death,  then  it 
must  be  for  annihilation  a  point  of  first  necessity  that  death 
should  be  extinction.  If  the  first  death  be  no"^  that,  why 
should  he  secopd  death  be  ?  And  moreover  the  wori.  for 
destruction  in  both  Greek  and  Hebrew  are  themselves  in 

m    !^  ^' r  "  '^^''  "  "^^^  t'-anslators  dmgnedly  covered  up  the  truth  » 
(Death  not  Life,  p.  64):    One  of  his  subsections  is  headed  "ihecTtho 
hcs  more  honest  in  their  translation  than  the  Protestants  »    Th 
writer  observes  (p.  104).  "  The  19th  century  has  rl^ttld  brl^n,  T" 
^  use  stpam  and  lightning,  and  it  will  yet  l^2L^Tl\oT,^::: 
urative  language  of  the  Bible  aright "  •" 


.\  { 


I 


.  'S 


484        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  PUTOBE  STATE, 

most  cases  used  for  death,  and  cjui  scarcely  be  pressed  as 
meaning  more  than  this.  xMr.  Constable  has  rightly,  there- 
fore, urged  that  in  consistency  this  meaning  of  death  must 
be  maintained.  » 

(3.)  But  this,  as  we  have  seen,  cuts  yet  more  deepjy :  and 
Mr.  C.'s  logical  mind  carries  it  out  further  than  many. 
Christ  truly  died.  Nay,  if  He  was  one  person  before  death, 
death  could  not  make  Him  two;  and  this  one  person  lay  in 
Joseph's  tomb.  We  must  not  think  of  any  person  else- 
where  In  paradise,  for  instance,— says  Mr.  Constable.     But 

if  that  be  true^  what  about  the  divhic  nature  V  Did  that 
become  impersonal,  or  did  it  lie  in  Joseph's  tomb  ^  It  is  a 
noticeable  fact,  how  much  annihilationisni  links  itself  with 
the  denial  of  Christ's  Deity.  With  this  also  the  Deity  of 
the  Holy  Ghost  comes  into  question.*  If  there  be  no  spirit 
of  man,  is  there  any  Spirit  of  God  •»  The  passage  already 
noticed  in  1  Cor.  ii.  11,  links  the  two  doctrines  close  enough 
together  to  make  any  tampering  with  the  one  bode  ominously 
the  downfall  of  the  other.  Ilcnde  far  and  wide  this  view  is 
also  spreading.  The  19th  century  may '' regulate  brains'' 
(alas,  what  about  hearts  ?),  but  not  the  Holy  Ghost.  It  is  a 
mesmeric  influence,  or  something  akin  to  electricity,  if  not 
rather  even  electricity  itself. 

(4.)  There  is  another  thing  which  naturally  connects  with 

.these,  but  is  found  much  more  widely.     Sin  is  softened 

down  in  all  cases.     You  must  not  ask  man  to  believe  in  a 

greater  penalty  attaching  to  it  than  his  natural  conscience. 


*  Mr.  Edw.  White,  himself  an  annihilationist,  shows  forcibly  that  the 
materialistic  argument  may  be  carried  on  to  atheism  :  "  If  man  has  no 
reason  to  believe  that  he  posesses  a  '  spirit '  in  hunself,  he  has  no  rea- 
son for  concluding  that  the  mind  revealed  in  nature  inheres  in  an  Eternal 
*  Spirit'.  .  .  .  Ifthought  is  a  function  of  matter,  it  is  right  to  conclude 
either,  pantheistically,  that  there  is  some  governing  thought  which  is  a 
function  of  the  matter  of  the  universe,  or,  atheistically,  that  there  is  no 
mind  in  nature,  notwithstanding  appearances.  Mr.  Constable  will  re- 
sist the  conclusion.  But  Prof.  Clifford,  a  more  consistent  materialist, 
stoutly  affirms  ii  {FortniyUly  Review,  No.  139, 1875)."  (Life  in  Christ, 
p.  206,  note). 


I 

LAST   WORDS  WITH  ANNIHILATI0NI8TS.  485 

<\n\\  as  that  may  be, . approves.  "The  doctrine  of  eternal 
an^utsh,"  Mr.  Hasting,  argues,  «  how  can  it  be  reeeived  by 
the  uMcvu^^r^  May  we  not  ask  that  of  a  good  dea^ 
more?  This  Christ  crucified-these  « things  of  the  Spirit 
ot   God   -how  can    the    "natural   man"   receive    them^ 

LThim''"R  "  '"''^  '^'""'^'^  "*^^^  '''  ^««^''«^"-« 
them  alT'  ^'''"'^      reasoning  wo  should  alike  discard 

Necessarily  then  the  judgment  of  sin  is  lowered      You' 
are  to  accommodate  the  penalty  to  the  conscience  of  the  im- 
penitent.     The  harder  the  conscience,  the  less  you  can  press 
upo"^rt  penalty  at  Hll.     Itmay  be  doubted  if  they  will  aLpt 

Zl      r  rV.  "'^'  '"'^'''  ''  ''  P^«'^'^'«^3^  -^^'^  that 
they  w,ll  not     The  argument  is  nor  without"  danger  there- 
tore  to  the  theory  it  supports.     And  if  '•  man  has  no  pre- 
cmmence  above  a  beast,"  even  in  the  highest  thing  he  has, 
as  Mr.  Constable  puts  it,  what  is  a  beast's  conscience  ?  and 
wnat  IS  the  measure  of  a  beast's  responsibliit3^^?  what  be- 
comes of  the  fall  V     Serious  questions  these,  if  we  are  to 
have  anything  left  of  Christianity  beside  the  name.V  The 
actual  fact  is,  .that  this  reasoning  is  being  followed  o\at  to 
Its  legitimate  result.     As  we  have  already  seen,  the  resur- 
rection oU^e  wicked  is  being  denied  by  many.     A  beast's 
end    IS  thua^  simply  and   wholly  a  man's  end.     And  that 
means,  there  is  absolutely  no  divine  judgment  at  all.    The 
wages  ofsm  is  death;  ^.  ..,  simply  what  a  beast  suffers.     Or 
If  It  be  the  suffering   in  view  of  death,  then  death  alone  is 
not  IS  wages,  and  the  most  hardened  suffers  least.  \ 

All  have  not  landed  there  yet :  in  many  ears  «  after  d^att. 
the  ,udgment »  bWrs  still ;  but  they  have  started  on  t^ 

Z^Wl'  "     l-r^'  ^"'^'^'P  t*^p;iots.     Another  who 
ijas  had  practical  experience  of  the  working  of  these  views  \ 

Z1^2l    ^'^  "^^-«^^^  -  <^estroyi4  responsibii;^ 
wa  fearful ,-  and,  in  people  of  grosser  habits,  rejection  of  all 
truth,  and  immorality.     The  tree  was  bad,  h  J  a  bad  sap 
and  so  was  cut  down,  and  there  was  ^n  end  of  it,"    "  And 
one  of  the  chief  teachers  in  the  United  States  declares  in  hi^ 


f 


f 


486 


FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 


book,  that  the  deep  diHtrefld  of  conscience  and  terror  about 
Bin  committed  was  a  base,  servile  fear  and  wrong.  To  one 
who  had  found  he  had  lost  the  atonement,  and  the  sense  of 
responsibility  out  of  his  mind,  and  who  asked  him  what  he 
made  of  responsibility,  he  replied,  it  was  impossible  to  re- 
concile it  with  his  system,  but  he  saw  it  in  Scripture,  and  so 
did  not  deny  it.'"* 

(5.)  The  writer  just  quoted  has  added  elsewhere  as  to  the 
effect  upon  atonement :  "  If  sin  means  eternal  exclusion 
from  God's  presence,  it  is  dreadful  enmity  against  God  now, 
exclusion  from  God  then.  If  death  is  the  only  wages  of 
sin,  Christ  had  no  more  to  suffer  for  me.  «Nay,  if  I  am  a 
Christian,  He  had  nothing  to  suffer,  if  I  die  before  the  Lord 
comes,  i  have  paid  the  wag^s  myself  If  it  be  only  some 
temporary  punishment  I  had  incurred,  He  Jiad  only  that  to 
bear.  *  My  God,,  my  God,  why  hast  Thou  forsaken  me  ? ' 
has  lost  its  force.  It  is  in  vain  to  say.  He  gives  us  life. 
He  can,  in  itself,  quicken  without  dying.  IP  He  died,  He. 
died  for  my  sins,  and  bore  them.  If  death  [sim'ply]  be  the 
wages  of  sin,  millions  of  saints  have  paid  them.  ^  And  if  a 
partial  punishment  be  all  I  had  to  bear,  it  is  all  Christ  had  to 
bear.  The  sense  of  sin  I  have,  and  its  desert,  is  not  being 
forsaken  of  God,  shuf  put  from  Him  when  I  know  what  it 
is,  but  a  temporary  punishment,  a  quantum  of  offence,  which 
is  all  I  have'to  think  of,  and  all  Christ  had  to  bear,  if  any- 

thing."t  /  ^         , 

Let  me  say  that,  perhaps,  none  rise  higher  than  this,  viz., 
the  substitutional  sacrifice  of  life  for  life,  the  death  of  the  cross 
no  more  than  a  martyr's  death,  to  which  the  Deity  of  the 
Sufferer  gave  all  its  value| — the  mass  go  lower  far,  as,  for 


f*  The  Eternity  Qf  Piinishraent  and  the  Immortal  if  jr  of  the  Soul,  pp. 
13o,  139.  . 

t  Ibid.,  p.  128. 

i  "  AndMt^is  a  truth  niver  to  b»  forgotten,  that  the  infinite  value 
which  pertains  to  the  one  sacrifice  of  Jesus,  arises,  not  from  any  inherent 
dignity  vo%  value  in  man,  as  the  subjecfof  redemption,  nor  from  the 
nature  or  extent  of  the  penalty  due  to  sinners,  but ...  fron/llis  own 


V 


■  .■^■l 


LAST  WOBDS  WITU   AlfN«U^I,OBI8T8.  48T 

"not  the  point-  buTL  wh!  ^  W  -'^ '''"''"'^^     '^*<^ 

N'r.rv,^,^    •  •       '  'n  What  that  vicanousness  involved 

of  p:™^r„r  ir  1"^"°  •"''■' "'  '^'^o  ^^^ 

for«.kcn  me  ?  "    That '    Vfhf     '  7   .°^'  f*"'  "^^  '^°» 
what  the  .acriflcelvolved      No^afL  T         J'*'  '" 

trust  and  joy.     It ,.,»,  the  blood  of  One  who  had  th,,i  h. 
laden  with  o„r  burden  of  iniquities,  and  bo^e^our  1. 

Cotht  int'th  ■""'  T'^^t'*  "'^  ''«'"^''  ''-o  -^W  be 
Drooght  into  the  sanctuary  by  the  high-priest  for  .i„  >- 

Even  so  Jesus  suffered,  the  Holv  One  in  th.  !         ,      f 
of  wrath  and  distance  from  a  hoj^od  ""^  ™"  » /"^"^ 

we  have  tin  Kl„„,l    r    .  '  V  ^«  «'«  MO^ 

we  have  no  blood  of  atonement,  no  eiBcacious  sacrifice  at  all 

Thus  anmh,Iat.on   strikes  at  the  vitals  of  Christi^t' ^ 

wh  le  mstead  of  resolving  the  problem  of  the  exi^^f 

*  Heb.  xiU  -  ^  . 


i.'il 


gfc* 
^ 


fM 


.'^ 


488         FACTS  AND  mRORIKR  AS  TO  A  nTTlTRR^TATB.. 

nity,  given  of  God  but  rosumod  by  Him,  a*  if  dofeiited  in  tho  MT^St 
object  for  which  life  was  given.     By  that  very /act  if.  is  thife'^.AA 
triumph  of  evil  rather  than  its  defeat.  ^     >!i^       ^^ 


'•  < 


rv 


CHAPTER  XLTV. 


LAST  WORDS  WITH  RE8T0RATI0NI8T8. 


Much  of  what  h||n&ecn  Haid  as  to  the  doctrine  of  condi- 
tional immortality  is  trwe  of  the  other  forrh  of  tho  denial  of 
eternal  punishment.  Especially  tho  qnarrel  with  Scripture 
is  even  more  plain,  and  its  authority  as  a  consequence  more 
directly  attacked.  There  are  those,  as  in  the  former  case, 
who  must  be  admitted  as  exceptions,  whose  arguments,  how- 
ever illogical,  seek  at  least  to  preserve  its  authority.  Yet 
even  Mr.  Jukes  maintains,  as  we  have  seen,  that  "  taken  in 
the  letter,  text  clashes  with  text  npoaJlfokiisujaject."  Ai^d 
Mr.  Cox  quotes  with<%probation,  fro  jdniBi|Bedal ^^^Wfjp^ 
already  referred' to,  his  averment  "  tJBHHP^^"»icient  siress 
has  been  laid  on  the  cardinal  fact  *  that  the  Scriptures  of  the 
!N"ew  Testament  contain  two  parallel  and  often  seemingly 
T(piita^dictory  BtatementsAs  to  the  last  things,  one  of  which, 
being  jealously  sifted  by  hostile  criticisms^  DOES 
theigppular  theology,  and  another  which  more  than 
l^es  a  ful^fwltbration,  and  the  final  victory  of  good  over 
evflf.'"  Still  others  speak  thus  of  "  irreconcilable  antino- 
mies "  in  Scripture.  Canon  Farrar  more  openly  and  boldly 
alleges  that  the  "  isolated  texts  "  which  seem  adverse  to  his 
view  may  be  "a  concession  to  ignorancg  "  or  "reflect  the 
ignorance  of  a  dark  age.^'  Prof.  Jellett  urges,  "Even. if  it 
be  conceded- that  according  to  the  most  probable  interpreta- 
tion of  the  texts  which  are  supposed  to  contain  the  doctrine 
of  endless  punishment,  they  do  contain  this  dDctrine,  it  may 
still  be-fisked— i>o^s  this  (Ueide  the  qnfiMimi  f    There  is  no 


''^Km 


•#■ 


Ifc- 


S 


LAST   WQ|tl)S   WITH    UKSTOIlATIONIbTB.  ^gQ 

infallibility  attached  to  the  proccwi  of  interpretation  771- 
rcasomyhy  ,.hich  the  hu,phatim  of  .Scripfnre  itself  u 
<^certameri  is  not  inf^Mihle.     Probability  i4  all  wo  cart  attai| 

The«o  tcstimonioH  might  bo  indefinitely  multipliod.  They^ 
demonstrate  not  more  the  tcndcncicH  of  ^iversali«m  to  a 
denial  of  tho  authority  of  the  word,  than  they  do  the  fact 
of  that  word  .bemg  almoHt  confessedly  tv^Xunt  it.  Thev 
would  not  ne^d  to  depreciate  a  testimony  which  was  in  their- 
,  own  favor.  The  counsel  for  a  case  does  not  brow-beat  his 
own  witnesses. 

(2.)  The  doctrjne  of-universalism,  m  whatever  form,  tends 
-   of  necessity,  though  in  another  way  from  ann'ihtlationism,  to 
make  light  of  sm.     It  represents  it  as  a  thinj?  capable  of 
being  reached  and  done  away  by  a  ccurse  of  salutary,  disci- 
pimo,  and  that  in  cases  where  all  the  riches  of  God's  love 
and  grace  have  been  expended  in  vain.     Sin  is  thi«made  the 
creature  of  circumstances,  by  a  Wise  or.lering  of  which  it 
^  may  be  extinguished,  and  God  as  the  Governor  o^His  crea- 
tures becomes  responsible  for  its  continuance.     It  w^  His 
dishonor  if  evil  coVitinrfe,  and  He  must  at  least  «|iare  the 
blame  of^it  with  man.     He  is  responsible  to  save.     Man  is 
perhaps  as  much  sinned  against  as  sinning.     His  life  here  is* 
no  proper  probation.     "  What  could  have  been  done  to  my  ' 
vineyard,  that  I  Have  not  done  in  it?"  admits  of  a  plain 
aniwer.-  -Man's  igrforance,  his  feebleness,  hismanifold  temp- 
tations, welknigh  balance  his  account  with  his  Maker;  and 
sm,  as  a  matter  of  human  responsibility  or  of  divine  judg 
ment,  become*  evidently  diminished  to  an  indefinite  extend 
That  full-blown  universalism   should  be  associated   with 
loose  morals  is  not,  therefore,'to  be  wondered  at.     Dr  Rlgg    ' 
affirms:  "The  same  universalists  who  ^peak  great  words 
about  the  universal  fatherhood  of  God  not  seldom  also  hold    ' 
the  doctrines  of  free  love.     It  has  been  my  lot  to  meet  with 
some  of  these  .  .  .  who,  in  extraordinary  rhapsodies,  mixed    • 
up  all  these  things,  and  whose  practice  corresponded  to  their 
prmciples."     But  the  practical  result  of  the  belief  is  not  to 


f 


'A 


1 


%. 


i 


N 


T 


'  ^      :■'      ,  .r 


;l(  ■■?! 


/    ,1 

1  ','■•' 


(-/ 


:.■-.■:.:,„., 


:$}' 


XI. 


490        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FUTURE  STATE. 

'  be  measured  by  the  mere  open  adherents.  There  are  masses 
"^  who  readily  take  the  license  without  caring  to  adhere  at  all. 
The  theory,  if  true,  renders  adherence  to  it  or  to  anything 
else  of  very  little  importance  in  the  eyes  of  many  who  would 
accept  the  consequences  very  gladly.  And  it  need  not  be 
doubted  that  the  circle  of  influence  which  such  views  exert 
reaches  very  far  beyond  the  number  of  its  professed  advo- 
cates. Just  here,  ind^d,  its  ripest  fruits  will  be  found ; 
nlan'swill  set  free  from .  the  restraint  of  divine  authority, 
openly  lawless,  and  completely  reprobate. 

But  those  who  cannot  go  the  whole  length  of  uni  versalism, 
as,  for  instance,  Canon  Farrar,  but  who  either  attach  no  limit 
to  probation,  or  at'  least  prolong  it  beyond  the  present  life, 
cannot  be  acquitted" of  ministering  to  the  same  unhappy  end. 
The  meaning  of  a  **  day  of  salvation  "  now,  proclaimed  is 
lost,  or  at  least-the  point  of  it.  If  it  be  said  that  only  now  . 
.  is  preached  complete  escape  from  the  need  of  purifying  fire, 
that  to  the  mass  of  men  is  a  very  different  thing,  of  almost 
mfinitely  less,  urgency;  while  souls  praying,  striving,  ago- 
nizing to  draw  nearer  to  the  light,  may  be  quite  unable  at  any 
rate  (as  they  teach)  to  escape  that.  How  many  will  think 
it  worth  while  to  pray  arid  strive  and  agonize  to  so  little 
purpose  ?  Hqw  many  will  :rather  wait  with  closed  ears  to 
every  warning  for  the  fire  that  is  at  anylrate  to  do  its  work, 
and  which  is  but  the  aepnian  fire  of  God's  love !  For  such 
souls,  Canon  Farrar,  and  such  as  he,  spite  of  his  protest, 
must  be  content  to  be  responsible;  and  if  the  "eternal 
hope "  they  would  fain  persuade  themselves  of,  be  (as  it 
surely  is)  a  mere  delusion,  then  are  they  responsible  for  the 
damnation  of  those  ^o  listen  to  and  approve  their  teach- 
ings. 

(3.)  And^ where  is  atonement  ?  where  the  value  of  Christ's 
"blood-shedding  ?  It  is  weH  known  that  universalism  in  its 
complete  development  denies  atonement  altogether ;  and  to 
this  denial  all  forms  of  it,  however  modified,  necessarily  tend. 
Mr.  Jukes  has  no  gospel ;  Dr.  Farrar  none.  The  "  poor  in 
spirit,"  the  strivers  after  the  light  go  down  helpless  to 


■K' 


■^^,-, 


I^SI  WORDS  WITH   BESIOBATIONISIS. 


401 

»onian  fire,  because,  if  there  be  an  eye  to  pity,  tliere  is  no 

for  the  worm  and  fire  of  Gehenna  speak  of  that.    They  are 
;       »ved  by  their  own  suffering,  not  by  Christ's ;  and  there  w  1 

would  Jl^L'TilT'''^ '^*' *"  Setnearer  to  the  lighf 
would  no  doubt  gladly  have  washed  their  robes,  but  either 

^nSy-rlTdJ'f  "-'  -''■     ^"^  '-'  --^'"r^^Z 
blJLVof^Z*"™"^f'^"  ''"''''■"''''''''''''<>  """"t  the 

Is  -    1°^  !       1     «'"«/e™»i>>eth  no  more  sacrifice  for 
sf  /    V       ^^t'o"  "  the  fruit  of  this  sacrifice  and 

tnZt  "^tholT""™  "'  "'^^"°-'  «""  H»  opposT;.  ts 
oontra»t,-those  who  go  into  it  must  find  ( f  salvation  at 

»  -I     T^    .,!"""" '•^'"""*'''»<"™  sm-oflering;  and 
although  under  the  law  a  spotless  and  unblemished  offering 
was  needed,^.e  has  discovered  that  in  the  antitype  GoT^lf 
not  reqmre  that.     Nor  is  vicarionsness  to  beTsis^^dTn 
A  smner  sufiering  for  his  own  sins  is  purified  sufliclX  by 

s  thT-X  S  "'  r  M-  ''"^'^'-  "«'■•'  -"  ^  -such  Sing 
is  .Ir^mtntdl''*"''"'''  "^  "^'  "P"t    ^'~f 

th.?"''  ^  f°^  I'  J"'*'*"*  '"  ^"'"S'  »»3  «e'tai„  to  do  all 

judgment  .s  thus  the  denUl  of  the  very  "  word  of  theT 
g.nnmg  of  Christ,"J  and  is  essentially  anulrfstial  ThM 
some  may  be  mvolved  in  it  who  are  very  far  from  meanW 
this  ,s  no  doubt  quite  true,  but  the  doctrine  is  SatanTtk^o 
destroy  the  truth  of  Christ;  and  wherever  it  is  fX  d tel 
oped  neffectuany  does  so.    Witness  the  constat  J^ttion 


>   I 


;^", 

'^;- 


/ 


^92        FACTS  AND  THEORIES  AS  TO  A  FtlTURE  STATE. 

wUh  unitarianism  in  the  body  that  has  adopted  the  name 
"  UniversalistJ  as  its  distinctive  title. 

Here  let  us  close :  it  is  useless  to  proceed  further. 
Beloved  reader,  vicarious  sacrifice  is  God's  only  means  of 
blessing  as  surely  as  Scripture  is  true  and  "  cannot  be 
broken."  The  faith  of  a  siived  man  is  a  faith  ^thich  can 
say  with  the  apostle:  "  Himself  bare  our  sins  in  His  own 
body  on  the  tree."  "  The  Lord  hath  laid  upon  Him^^e 
iniquity  of  us  all."  Jesus  is  now  risen  from  the  d[e^dtv^^<l 
in  testimony  of  the  full  acceptance  of  that  work  accol|fMf  ed 
is  gone  into  the  presence  and  glory  of  God.  The  sinsi^then 
that  were  laid  upon  Him  are  gone.  Whose  are  ihey  i* 
Are  they  yours  ?  Beloved,  they  arc  those  of  all,  who  in  the 
consciousness  of  sin  and  helplessness,  "  have  put  their  trust 
in  Him"  for  their  eternal  salvation.  Their  peace  is  made. 
Their  sins,  borne  by  9im,  are  gone.  And  the  coming  of 
Jesus  will  put  them,  without  question  or  challenge,  into  the 
blessedness  of  His  Father  s  house,  which  He  went  to  prepare 
as  their  abiding  home.  It  is  yours  to  choose,  reader,  whether 
you  will  have  your  "  part '' in  the  lake  of  fire  with  the 
devil  and  his  angels,  or  with  the  "  blessed  and  holy  "  of  the 
first  resurrection  in  the  only  really  "  Eternal  City." 

It  may  suit  you,  alas,  tlo  soften  down  the  terrors  of  the 
day  of  wrath,  but  what  if  you  should  find  God  just  in  in- 
flicting severer  punishment  than  now  your  conscieiice,  pr 
your  want  of  it,  can  allow  as  righteous  V  O,  ponder  .tho.se 
words  of  the  very  One  who  came  to  save  !  "Everlasting 
fire,"  "undying  worm,"  are  after  all  realities.  They  abide, 
the  solemii  figures  of  judgment  to  come.  On  the  other 
hand,  God's  grace  invites  you — whoso  comes  to  Christ, 
He  will  in  no  wise  cast  out. 

Reader,  if  you  be  one  of  His  redeemed,  trifle  not  with 
that  which  undernynes  the  reality  of  His  blessed  work,  and 
with  that  the  reality  of  sin,  and  of  its  judgment. 

"  A  little  leayen  leaveneth  the  whole  lump." 

■.■    .'     THE  END.'  •  "  "■■  '""■'"■ 


Dqui. 


INDEX  OF  texts; 


Gen.i.aa 

U-  ~ 

iii  15 

v.u 

vi.  3......... 

17   

Wi.  « 

ix  <i ,, 

xviii 

xxii.  18 

x.vxii 

xxxv.  IS   ..... 

xxxvii  a-)  .... 

„     Mi. .IS. 

Kxod.  xix.  r> 

:i» 

xs.  •.•(> 

xx\!i.  .-I.' 

xxxiii.  ;)J 

xvxiv  (I.  r..., 

,        , .       ^ 

Li-v.ii  n 

liv..  

xxiv.  17,18.... 
Niiiii.  xvi.  ■,>„>... 

30,  3a... 

„  /  xxvii.  KJ 

I><fi".  iv.  4i> 

viii.  :»....,,., 
vxv.  :>.  3  :..., 
xxvtii.  (;i-G.3. 

/     XXX    1  ;{ 

.      xx.\«.  ^i.  .... 

•lo^li.  ii.  11 

••ii(l;,'oy  viii.  :i  .... 
I  !^am.  xxviii...  . 

y  hum   xii.  ij 

'       xxir.  1(1   

I  Iviiii,"^  viii   l\i... 

X.Ty 

xviL  ^>i....  .. 

~  KiiiiT!*  vi.  17 

1  «'lin)n.  xii;  'Ai  .'. 
'■i  t'liroii.  i.  St.  10.. 

•'"•> , 

i.  t> 

iii   l:i-17 

X.  lit 

xi.  at 

xii   10 

xiv  7 

10 

.  V  

\ix   'M....... 

xxiii    Kt...... 

x.xiv.  1-3.4... 


.40,  47, 


.  1!)4, 


ii 


•••••« 
%.••••• 


PAOE 

54,  .r, 
5;J,  57 
...4>'sJ 
...1.37 

...4m 

..  51 

51.  ra 

..431 
...  +1 

..  m) 

...3»8 
..  44 
..  75 
..140 
..  4a 

..:m 

.4()7 

aas 

'■Hit 

— 4aa 

aa8 

...  .itii 

317-317 
74 
...51,  H5 

•  ■ 147 

>•••••  rv) 

......233 

>  •  •• .  .4(17 

.....4;i-) 

1K'.J 

.....IH't 

14tj 

07 

...*■>:,  70 
.  lah.  lay 

14« 

—  rA 

iSH) 

4.'> 

7.5 

lait 

m 

r;0 

.i3i-i:j.-. 
.  ..  ;itH» 
.i:k,  i:;o 

41 

IMI 

lil 

.  ..   i:;s 

.. ...  ai 

.., .  4<!5 
.....a:i7 


v;;::: 

•  •  f  •  ■ « < 


Job  xxvii.  3........ 

xxxif.  8........ 

xxxiii.  4........ 

18-30,.... 

aa.. ./.... 
aa-aa 

xxxiv.  14 J    .., 

ai-afr.... 

.xxxvi.  8-14...., 

xxxvii /.. 

xxxviii.  7 1 
PsaliiiH. 

vi.  5  . 1... 

vii.  »....!.. 

i\  ; 

xviii  44,45.. 

xxviii  5  i.... 

XXX.  5... I 

x.xxvi.  9  i 

xxxvii  <.i  II. 
ao.  .., 
3H  .... 

xxxlx.  13.... 

xlix      ....... 

14 

Iii.  5 

Iviii.  ..,'...... 

Ixii.  la 

Ixix.  as 

Ixxxiii; 

Ixxxvi^  13... 

xc.  8,  y,  la. , . . 

ci 

ciii.  U 

civ.  a.%-30 

30 

ay 

T> 

<vi  •■« 

^CXV.  Iji 

cxxxii.  13, 14. 

cx.vxix.  7  .... 

/        8.... 

c.vli.  7 

txriii.  a ... 

«-.\(iv.  4  — ... 

10 

•» 

.V  .  .   .  •  .  •  • 

3,4.... 


■>• 


cx,'iv. 
c.Vlvi. 


I'rov 


/ 


U.  aa . . 

ix.  12... 

18... 
^i.3i... 


PAOK 

...  40,47 
• ■ > • • a . Ino 

•  •••••         l>7 

•  • 4t 

ti:i:> 

< • ■  •  •  •  ■     oC 

1.37 

....41,  47 

a35 

aas 

a+» 

;«io- 

..iaa,  134 

.....  14a 

.....ai3 

>•••••■  iJ4«  J 
..304 

. .  188,  189 

4a;i 

41 

a;w 

-188 

..188 

m 

140 

...188,  I'.tO 

a+j 

4a:i 

...188,  ai3 

>  >  -  a  •  •  •  .  Xi44 

14(i 

-m 

a44 

• 4a3 

114 

>   a   •   ••  a   ,       •>! 

41,51 

'.>i. 

aia 

14a 

■  •  •  ■  •  a       ..O  I 

41 

. . .  Mti,  4J3 

14« 

t.iii 

141 

470 

...137,141 

141 

.......134 

an 

......  4t;a 

•  ••....  ]4ti 

a;]8 


•  M.T.'  lists  „f  ,,as>r;|.,'.--  not  otiurwi...  nf.ri^-a  to  .m-  not 


,'ivcii  ill  this  index. 


^:. 


494 


IKDEX  O*  TEllS. 


PAUE 

Prov.xiv.  29 70 

xvi.4 470 

kx.  27. 63 

XXX.  8 64 

Kccles ],S4 

I  13-  ■-. m 

ii.  1.  » •.    49 

iii.  18 ..^.. 49 

19-31  

,     10 188 

xl.  5 50,139 

xii.7 47,75,140 

13,14 140 

I$aiahi.28 188 

li...... ....„ 244 

Xi.  1,  3...'. ................. .245,  281 

xxiv.  21-23. 111.296,304 

.  —     .    . ZXvl«   !!■••••■••••«••••*•••*«•••••  .«41 

15-19..... i...3ft3 

xxvii.  tf ....238 

13 .....390 

M  ■  XXX.  33 J. ..310 

P  xxxiv.  9,  10 ....335 

xxxviii.  10 ....145 

>  18,  19 : 130,  142 

xlil.  5 47 

xllx.9 424 

liii.  10,  U 82 

13 422 

Ivii.  1,  2 .148,188 

16 47,53,278,424 

Ixv.  17 242 

Ixvi.  16 188 

22    242 

.23,  24.. ;...... 2.51,  310,  313,  479 

Jer.  Ix.  7.. 465 

xii  3 188 

xvii  27..... 312 

xlviii.  47 391 

xlix  0 391 

Ezek.iii.  18 ....'. 187 

xiii.  22 ; 187 

xvi.  55,  61 391 

xviii.  4 130,187 

27 80.  230 

30. .360 

IX.  49 160 

xxxiL  27 147 

•xxxiii.  8 a ........187 

xxxvil.  1-14 .....;J91,  .392 

•    xlvii.  1-12 250 

Diiniel  iv 86 

10 64 

14 213 

viL8 331 

11 3;J1,832 

,   ix  26 189 

xii.  2 392,436 

/'lIoHvaviy ...;.. 424 

T2 ...893 

Xiii.  9-14 891 

xiv.  4 , 424 

-.  '    "    Arnosix.2... 146  i 

.Micahiv.  1-4 235  I 

V  H 383-383  I 

vii.  18-20 .,423 

Nah.  i.  15 211 


PAGK 

I  Hab.  1.  .5 i..200 

'  Zeph.  i.  2,  3 , 212 

Zccli.  xii   1 48,  52 

I  10-xiii.  1 ,.-&'.» 

'  Mai   iv.  1-3... .....:.. 245 

Matt.  Iii.  10.... 213 

12 277 

vii    19 ,. 218 

I  ix.  6 406 

X.  15 292, 

28 56,  61,  62,  97,  209-211,  .307 

29 194 

39 307,  308 

Xi.  21-24* 371 

22.... .292 

xil*  3«*  •••••••••*«•  •••.•.••  •  376-370. 

41 371 

49,60 .3H4 

xiii.  10,  11 102 

•  24-30 ......Ill 

33 101 

xvi.  18 ......145 

Md~i«4  •  ■••••••••■•■•••••••■  ixiy    I  i 

xviii.  10,  11,14 .467 

xix.29   177 

^  A»***         1*J»    •    •        •■■•••••••••••••••«•••      B    1^1     ti 

^i  ¥•    tX/  •  •  aim  ••••■•■•jaa**aaaa>  ••■■  iCi  if 
»i  1  ~nv  •  ••»mm0*mtta*mm»mm      0«>i>~~0Ut7 

Markii  32 197 

iii.  29 .378 

iv.  13 161 

vi.  11 ...292 

\iii.  12 69 

ix.  10 285 

4:J^ 310,478 


30. 


.11 


XV.  46 26 

Lukei.  as... ..;.... ...263 

46,47 68 

70 , • 262 

vii.  81 , 447 

ix.  25 77 

28-36....... .......122,  123 

56 425 

60.. .....205 

JLII*    lU^Av   aaaaaaaaaaaftaaaaaaaaaaaa       i  iS 

2:1 201 

47,48 i.425 

xiii.  28 «.479 

XV.  4 161 

xvi 101-111 

9 ..294,466 

26 ...380 

xix.  27 279 

XX.  18, 279 

27-38 ...217-220 

34-36 ..285,365 

37.38 106,137 

xxiii.  43 115,148,294 

xxiv.  36-39 .'.,'.'.".*.'.'.'.*.'.'.'.'.*.'ll2 

39 22 

Jolini.  4 176 

10-13 ...../.. ..468 

29 » 404 

li.  19-22 ....28 

8 ..,, 85 


mbEX  OF  TEXiS.' 


495 


John  lli.  13  ....  **'*°« 


14, 
35. 


1-M 
•476,  491 


Iv.  24. 


V.  11,  12  , 

!iJ4.  ... 

^-29. 

27..... 
Vi.  37-39. 

53,54. 
Vli.  17  , 


......403 

..'...KG 
.....  37 

• ; ... 170 
.176,200 


Com.  xiv;  17, 


FAUI 


28. 


xvi.  25. 
1  Cor.  11.  6. 


.  43 

.28.3 


!•••■■•■ 


.222 


439    . 

405  1 

.176,  179  I 
.159  ,' 


10. 
11. 
12. 
14 


.269,  874 

202 

261 

39 


HI.  18-15. 


JlWi^'** ' -»4,301 


17. 


32 
X.  18... 
xil.  25 

31 


262 
27 


vl.  2. 
13. 


46,  62,  66  66 
>......  4>#  •  40 

' . .  .•     •* .  81 

318 

•••• 201 


•62,466 
SI  tii'"" 301,468 


vHi.  13. 
X.  11 


299 
.202 
.864 


xi.29;"  248,  J;61 


^iy.l-ii. ^-^^ 


394,  4a5 


29 
SO. 


277 


xlii.  12... 


283 


.30. 
xvi.  11. 
xvii.  3 
xi.v   42 
.Actsii.  27.. 


42,  230 


XV. 


....  217 

■  160,  4^8 


..301 
.301 


30-23, 


287 


^28:v.v.*:.v "••'^''tki 


34. 


iii.21. 


"•■-■■,7- 

<P.  14.> 

.  i2r 


23. 
24 


24-28. 


26 


401 
.128 
.242 
.266 


62,  3<J8 

75,  115 

Ids,  197 


XV.  18.... 

xvii.  25.. 

28.., 

xxiLi.8,9. 


XXV.  10 ^_  ••'*'' 

Rom.  i.  22  2.3     


200 
...262 
...  41 
.41,42 
■5,  114 


29-31. 
36... 
42-50. 
43.... 
44 


.103,202 
.....420 

92 

.168-165 
22 


5q"" 65,  73 


li.  5-16. 


38 
.223 

8^.v.v.';;.v ^'^'i?* 

"Mr' ••••;'"":.::::-^ 

iv.5    •••. -...224,468 

V.  .5. ' 


xvi  22. 


486 


196     2  Cor.  1.  8 


2:» 

43 

230 


lU, 


6  _ • 22,23 


Iv.  11. 


V.  1 


10». 


156 
.228 
.166 
.201 


6,8. 


1  J..JJ  

i9.:v. ■•-• ^^^•'wo 


vi.  22 


)4 


10. 

19. 

vi.  1. 


..94.  106 

..-.21,24,  96 
.292,  466,  472 
899,  428 


\n. 


r.'. '.'.'.'  '^ l^f  213  } 


9. 


22 


xiL  2 


.429 
■  466 


.150 


xiii.  14 , 


4 • 21,  100 

151,  160 


25V.'.V. *i     «al.  ii.20 


vm.  6. 


6-8, 


11.... 
19-23. 


23, 

20,27 
ix.3 , 


.1*1,895, 


23 
19 
32 
42 

.288 


43 


5,  .399 
.4.36 
■  39 

4'     '< ■» .239,383 

_  f ••• 437,470 

10.. 

^- J*;;;-;; 44i 

^^ ••'••••."•.■239;383V^5 

xlv  fl 402 


13. 


ia.«.-.v;:::;;;;;:;;- "'..^ 

.2:» 

.407 

.42 

32 


16. 


iv.  6. 


V  17,  22-25, 


Eph.  i.  3 


*!•••••••« 


....448 
. . • .  81 


in ^♦•....151,  402 

U 398,402 

21 266 

iv  10 264 

30.*!!!!'. ®^ 

vi.  H   12 ' ' •••  48 

Phil.  1.  21-24 • V,V*» 

22.7:...'."!' "^'  ^'^ 

n  1,  - tvn  ii.  10  11"^^™'- 21 

^-*^ ..425  i Col.  1. 13.'. :...•.•.:• ^,4p 


m 


INDEX  OP  TEXTS. 


'i 


<^ 


,                                       EAOK 
Col.  i.  18. 1!» 

19,20 , 399,  425 

80 ^ 40!i 

Ui.8 178,224 

4 ...i 28fl 

10...... 227 

1  ThtfBS.  Iv.  15-17 166,  286,  289 

V.8  ..i..^. 202 

23....-.^.. 25,  29-84 

■♦ThcHrt.  1.  7-9 5J79 

9.. ...202,352 

il*  7,  8 »....«•••• ■  ••  •  .281 

12 ...  81 

ITim.  i.  17......... 164.260 

11.  I-0»  •••••••••••••••••■•••••••  p^WX 

8-7. 895 

14 ...  81 

Iv.  10..... 402 

V.6 205 

Vl*  Aa^****!  ••••••  ••••«  •••»•  ••••■  »*SUi 

9.... «ie.. 202 

16..... .Vr: Ift3,  168 

■J  Tim.  1.9 269.274 

-      10....... 125,202,400 

16,18 420 

ii  20 470 

iii.8 ....201 

16,  17.; 169 

V.  12.  ............................  M>i 

Titiis  1.  2 ..:..177,  269,  274 


il.  Il,a2... 
\      iii.5....... 

^hiluInon  15... 

Ilcb.  i.  8 

U.  5-8 

8,9 

10... 

Iv.  7','ii.".*. 

vi.  1 , 

4-6'.... 

viii.  4 

1x8 

21-24.... 

26-28... 
X.  1.. 

27-29 

xi.  13-16... 
xit  9...... 

23  ...»•• 
xiH».3.... 


.429 

269 

........  243 

...-. 429 

.........476 

..,..202,899 

381 

491 

.; 470 

!•■•      ••••■■41    X 

126 

399 

221,225 

250 

>•••■••■•  •4«'l 

.128 

W 

.46,75,  116 
21 


»••••••••• 


« .....262,268.348 

11    .  ^...  ........................  4rTj 

Jamed  i.  9,  l^............u.^. 125 

ii.  26....... 64 

.    iii.  15 74 

iv.  14 12.5,200 

1  Pet.  iii.  18-20.  .45, 75,  IH,  295, 373-5, 466 

iv.  6 -t^,  .i .375,376 

17, 18-  ...•........-....*. .*o4,  ol8 

SPeterL  14.... , 21,24,  ft3 

15 23,  95 

•^9. •.*">8 

12. •—aOi 


FAQB 

2Peter  II,  17 , -264 

iii.  18 242 

18 204 

IJohnl.  7 280 

ii.2 404 

8 461 

lu.l..... ,179 

2 120,  121 

8«*->a«*«****'**>*'-^********  •'■v4 

14,  15..: ...176 

lv.6 > i...l5r 

18. V 858 

V.12 205^ 

13 , Ill 

16 217 

JudeT 385 

18. 204 

19 42,  74 

25.... 262 

Kcv.iS 123 

6*9..... 75 

T  240 

I,  ■■•■■••        •■••■•••••••••■•■•••  *rM^J 

18.; 2»i.-. 

|i.  25-27 241 

ill.    Q.'^ajv***  •-••••■••  >••  •>••»■•«•  •■'fcIO 

21.  .:j... . ..*...... •.- 242 

Iv.  9,  Wy 2U.i 

V.  18... 4044  430 

14 : 26;^ 

VllI*  •»•  ••••■•••  •••••••••••••••••'"  •^''l 

IX •    if  *   ••*■••••••••••••••••""••• 41 * 

»    11 303,447 

X.  6. ••••••••••••  •■■••••••••••••••**■" 

XI*     !•. ••••••••••"*•••  ••••••••••  •'•H^l 

15.  .•••••■••••*>>>*«*B*  «>•••••«•  t^t)! 

Xili*  11  «••••••■••••••."••••••■••  •  «J*5'' 

Id*  ••••■•«■•••*'************  ^'^ 
xlv.  6,  7 ••••• 30'^ 

9^11.....:.. 850-355 

XV.  1 ...'..• •^•''3 

X  vi .    J#.»-....--^. •••••••••••••••*  :€M 

xviii  8  ••••••  ••■••••••••.••  ••••••  ■H" 

11 3.;u 

12.  •............♦•..■••■•■' '   .•"'•J* 

xviii.  8 3;i9 

xix.,  XX....  ....... ?»1,  282,  319-3-1!) 

xix.3 r. ;^40 

19-XX.3 ■' Ill,  VOS 

20.. 3;il,  340,  a-ll 

XX •..•.••  ra 

1,8 448 

■     ,  2 ;;oi. 

4-6..... 286.  299 

9,  10 303,320.478 

11-15 285.  :^24 

13 145,298 

14... 192 

Xxi.1-5 242 

4,5 ,..401,480 

£i   .■■••••••••••••••••■••••"•    ■  ^i*^ 

XXil.  I*  ^•••••••••••^•••••*  •  •^•Jv?  OiH* 

5 ais 

19 ..-. 347 


FAOS 
....'264 
....-M2 

....264 
....280 
....404 
....461 

120,  121 

!!!!lT« 

i . . . 157 

....85« 

....205^ 

....111 

....217 

....38.'> 

....204 

.42,  74 

....2('>2 

123 

75 

.,..240 
,....2»i.". 

241 

21.S 

....242 

2(5:1 

404*,  43() 

263 

2<il 

447 

303,  447 

270 

;....447 
, . . . .267 

3:53 

45 

3()2 

.850-355 

s.'-.s 

......353 

448 

;i-ii 

.. .   .83-' 

330 

319-34!) 

MO 

111.  ',-05 

340,  y-ii 
.....  79 

'.'.'.'.  .;;oi. 

286.  2ttg 
320.478 
.285.  :^!M 
.145,296 

192 

242 

401,480 

250 

2.50,  396 

4*)' 

»15 

•  ••,•■  't^y^ 
347 


m 


I  ■'  ■ 


/ 


y 


/ 


/ 


-/ 

.    ' ' 

IZI- -.'-..  .      .    .^  .  . 

"      \  '■ 

.* 

' . .:  ■ 

■".■"■"■■,-- 

... 

;      ,.         * 

'■• 

-; ;  .  ■  4. 

■*■.'■ 

':'■-■'.    ■' 

^  ■           - 

> 

^                     ■■-■■.■ 

*t  .  ..."  1. 


*  ♦ 


■% 


* 


:'  "■■;i^    ■  ■ 

1 

( 

-           "^ 

• 

'•"■»' "' 

:   V                            tf 

• 

• 

:# 

• 

, 

' 

'  ■ 

> 

• 

*        » 

* 

•          1                  /' 

• 

. 

'    .    .   '      •-• 

■ 

It 

• 

- 

■      ^ 

• 

• 

, 

# 

."■"-^ 

» 

I 

f 

1 

4 

■;#' 

i 

"  ■            ■             ■ 

■  r 

e      -• 

# 

^ 

■-;■.'-•'■     I  ■■ 

•' 

'■■i      V 

^        1 

■■■■1 

■■■■■■■■■ 

r 

m  '  . 

1 

^ 

1 

1 

1 

^1 

I 

^^^B 

1 

1 

B 

1 

1 

f 

r: 

^ 

J 

^ 

■ 

L 

=:' 

.■        ..'■.■■     '"         '      ■'■                  .          ' 

->  ■ 

*  J 

1 

■ 

V 

... 

1 

\ 

1^ 

■    »      ■ 

—.■ 

1 

i 

i 

1 

F 

\ 

'  •"  .■ 

■•  ■ 

« 

■M 

.  i 

-"■jB 

( 

( 

1 

1 

f 

*■, 

1 

^■^V 

1 

6 

■  #■ 

^^^^^ 

A 

*' 

»     - 

■■■''^^^-    '  '^ 

■     (.1 

«  . 

-  4' 

ffiv 

■ ,  .  . ._ 

" 

- 

•^* 

3 

-1 

t 

„ 

. 

- 

-      .;     • 

\ 

■  ,4 

-•..'- 

« 

-  -. .-. 

,..^_.:_ 

,,:  --»*    ■ 

i 

■    ■" 

\;.^^, 

■■■*-': 

-    '■■' 

:'':3,. 

■l.i  ■ 

•      ■.       ■          .■         ■*.  . 

b: 

V  ""."■■.  ■ 
■■   ■"■'*'  ■■   '                 ■■'■■-■ 

■> 

.  1 

'  ;^       '  ■ 

% 

s> 


I    '  r/ 


'k 


^' 


p 


